For those here who want to dig deeper into the lies presented by mainstream (i.e. government-funded) science, these are some pretty damning video presentations.
Forget that PCR is not a valid diagnostic tool (it is not), but it might not even be a valid replication tool, either:
https://rumble.com/v1helnt-everything-you-need-to-know-about-pcr-tests-tom-cowan.html
Digging even deeper, recent findings show that DNA is NOT the same in every cell in the body -- and "Does DNA really exist?" turns out to be a valid question, too. DNA follows the same fake science as PCR and viruses -- NOTHING is taken directly from the human body to be studied, but rather ALL of it is a MIXING of human tissue with chemicals that do not exist in the body -- and then the final product is ASSUMED to have some sort of profound meaning.
https://rumble.com/v1hglvt-genetics-dna-and-rna-webinar-by-tom-cowan-aug.-26-2022.html
In part of that 2nd video, Stefan Lanka explains that 25 geneticists at UC Berkley could not figure out a simple question: "What is a gene?" Their meeting ended in shouting and accusations, and no science. He says that geneticists have disproven their own theories, but have not told virologists or the public.
This would mean that DNA tests, paternity tests, forensic criminal DNA tests, genetic ancestry tests, so-called genetic illnesses ... are ALL suspect as being completely bogus and not scientific in any way.
Mind-blowing stuff.
Poisoned monkey kidney debris and computer-generated, re-assembled bits of disintegrated human RNA fragments are the ENTIRETY of their "proof" that viruses exist, backed up by zero control experiments and zero attempts to falsify their hypothesis.
Virology is the very definition of pseudoscience!
This is assuming that they formed a coherent null hypothesis. We know that they don't actually use science.
Another great point, you are spot on! They don't even attempt a null hypothesis but most folks don't quite know what that means so I stick with the the falsification angle!
Is the lack of society's understanding of the "Null Hypothesis" by design? Its a very, very simple concept that is, almost unnaturally hard to describe to the normie. Almost as if you have to unravel the many layers of mal-education pounded into the average person's brain.
I think the word "null" throws most well of the scent...hahaha :)
I've had to explain it one too many times to perfectly intelligent folks such that I've learned to avoid it going forward.