of natural coronaviruses in the lab, researchers often use a method called in vitro genome assembly.
"In vitro" means in a lab, not inside a person or animal.
This method utilizes special enzymes called restriction enzymes to generate DNA building blocks
IOW: These DNA building blocks are CREATED in a lab.
that then can be “stitched” together in the correct order of the viral genome.
HOW do they KNOW it is the "corect order?"
They MUST have an actual sample of the "real thing" from "the wild" to compare it to.
Do they state they DO HAVE this natural-occuring thing to compare this lab-made thing?
NO!
The do NOT have a REAL sample of a REAL "virus" to compare this man-made thing to.
Therefore, they do NOT know if the DNA is "stiched together in the correct order of the viral genome."
That's because the "viral genome" they are working with was MADE IN A COMPUTER, and NEVER TAKEN FROM A REAL "VIRUS."
To make a virus in the lab, researchers usually engineer the viral genome to add and remove stitching sites, called restriction sites. The ways researchers modify these sites can serve as fingerprints of in vitro genome assembly.
Sure, that can show that SOMETHING was created in a lab.
But you still have to COMPARE IT TO THE REAL THING.
They DO NOT have the real thing -- and nobody ever has.
Why? Because the "real thing" has never existed.
They CREATED this thing they studied -- in a lab.
Then, they CONCLUDED that it was made in a lab!
WOW!
What a discovery!
If I tell you that this horse right here is the product of 2 unicorns mating, but for some odd reason it does not have the horn on its head, the FIRST thing you should say is, "Well, show me the REAL unicorns so I can compare this thing to the real thing." And you won't be able to, because unicorns do not exist in the real world.
But you can make an AI-generated computer image.
We found that SARS-CoV
NOTE: Here, they are talking about the lab sample they got, not a "real" SARS-CoV-2 virus.
has the restriction site fingerprint that is typical for synthetic viruses.
RIGHT !!!
Because the man-made SYNTHETIC "virus" is the ONLY thing that any lab has EVER studied.
ALL the samples to study are man-made!
NONE of them are from a REAL virus (because getting a sample of THAT is impossible).
The synthetic fingerprint of SARS-CoV-2 is anomalous in wild coronaviruses, and common in lab-assembled viruses.
And THIS is a claim they CANNOT PROVE.
WHERE is their "wild coronavirus" against which they can compare this sample?
THEY. DO. NOT. HAVE. ONE.
The ONLY thing they have here is a man-made thing, which has something in it that makes it obvious that it is man-made, and then they CLAIM this makes it different from the real thing.
Where is their CONTROL for this study?
Where is their PROOF that the REAL virus is different from this thing?
THEY. HAVE. NO. PROOF.
They just have a claim. Nothing more.
and the concentration of these silent mutations in the restriction sites is extremely unlikely to have arisen by random evolution. Both the restriction site fingerprint and the pattern of mutations generating them are extremely unlikely in wild coronaviruses and nearly universal in synthetic viruses. Our findings strongly suggest a synthetic origin of SARS-CoV2.
WRONG CONCLUSION.
Their findings strongly suggest that the PARTICULAR STUFF they are looking at was man-made -- because THEY made it!
Just look at the "Full Text" under "Materials and Methods."
They tell you right there HOW THEY MADE IT.
WHERE IS THEIR CONTROL?
WHERE IS THEIR DOCUMENTATION OF THE "REAL" VIRUS AND HOW IT DIFFERS FROM THIS STUFF?
The reality is that they used an INVALID method to "find" the virus, and then used computer models to "create" the DNA sequence.
They NEVER found the actual virus -- because nobody has, because it does not exist.
We report a high likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated as an infectious clone assembled in vitro.
Once again, they offer ZERO PROOF that this thing is INFECTIOUS.
They just make the CLAIM and expect everyone to believe it.
So, the thing they are looking at has obvious signs that it was made in a lab.
So what?
That does NOT mean it is infectious. Where is their evidence for this claim?
THEY. HAVE. NONE.
Full Text - Introduction:
There are currently two hypotheses on the origin of SARS-CoV-2. The first hypothesis posits that SARS-CoV-2 has a natural origin and spilled over from animals to people at the Huanan seafood market
The second hypothesis on the origin of SARS-CoV-2 posits that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a lab as a result of coronavirus (CoV) research.
False. There is also a third hypothesis, that the researches themselves are using an INVALID method to "study the virus." They are NOT USING ANY CONTROLS to validate the results of their study.
They have no sample of the "real thing" to compare to.
They (a) create something in a lab, and then (b) conclude that this something was made in a lab.
Duh!
They also CLAIM it is infections, but offer ZERO PROOF of the claim.
If there is no control, then IT IS NOT VALID RESEARCH.
They basically ADMIT this with this sentence:
Researchers would explore the relationship between viral genotypes & human-infectivity phenotypes by a variety of experiments ... Such experiments require making infectious clones, which requires assembling ... in vitro.
They "clone" by way of looking up the DNA sequence in a database -- but they don't tell you that this DNA sequence was NOT taken from the real thing.
The sequence, too, was MAN-MADE.
So, they take a man-made sequence from the database, and CREATE IN LAB something that has the sequence, and CLAIM it is the same as the "real thing."
But what they NEVER do ... is get a sample of the "real thing."
Because it does not exist in any lab anywhere in the world.
Weird ... for such a "deadly virus" ... huh?
ALL of this is manipulation IN THE LAB OF SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE REAL THING -- because nobody has the real thing.
Under their Methods section:
To make infectious clones from wild coronaviruses, one must synthesize a full-length DNA copy of the viral genome.
Do you guys realize how STUPID this statement is?
They are making a CLONE "from wild coronaviruses" ... by SYNTHESIZING (man-made in a lab) a copy of viral genome.
Why do they need to SYNTHESIZE it if they already have the REAL THING? Because they don't have the real thing.
So, they have to CREATE something in a lab and claim it is the real thing.
IOW: They create in a lab something which shows the same DNA profile as the DNA profile that was CREATED in a computer model, and never from a real thing.
IF they had the real thing, they would (a) take the real thing, then (b) add whatever Dr. Evil stuff they wanted to, and (c) produce the evil product.
That evil product could then be reverse-engineered to show that it had something added to it that could only come from a lab.
BUT ... they have to FIRST have the real thing, so they can use that as a control.
Instead, they just start with assumptions, make something in a lab, and then claim it means something.
The only "smoking gun" from this paper is that they NEVER had a REAL virus as a CONTROL so they could COMPARE this thing they were studying with the real thing.
And the reason they never had the real thing is because it does not exist.
The only things that has EVER been studied are these fake man-made concoctions that they CLAIM is the same as the real thing.
Well if it is, then PROVE it.
They never have. There is too much money -- and ego -- tied up in the deception.
ALL samples that are "studied" are of lab origin because the real thing has never existed.
Therefore, they also can NEVER show that the "real thing" is pathogenic or transmissible.
I also find it interesting that they do not even TRY to prove that this lab-created thing is either pathogenic or transmissible.
They only make the CLAIM, and expect the reader to accept it.
But nobody should accept a mere claim.
PROVE that even this lab-made thing is pathogenic or transmissible.
NOBODY WILL DO THAT.
Under "Materials and Metods" --
Coronavirus genomes for our phylogeny were obtained ... Spike gene ORFs were obtained by searching the NCBI Gene database ...
Spike genes were translated ... A maximum likelihood phylogeny was constructed with default settings ...
Notice, they did not say they bought a sample of SARS-CoV-2. Instead, they looked up the genome sequence and CREATED THEIR OWN SAMPLE TO STUDY.
What these "researchers" did was ...
They looked up a computer-generated DNA sequence of something
They created the something -- in their own lab
They studied the something -- in their own lab
They concluded that the something must have been man-made (duh!)
They also claimed it was pathogenic ... but offered no evidence.
And they never so much as MENTIONED the concept that they might want to also get a copy of the REAL THING so they could COMPARE their results with the real thing ... because they already knew that it does not exist.
In conclusion, this is GAW. That means: WAKE THE FUCK UP.
Again -- If I tell you that this horse right here is the product of 2 unicorns mating, but for some odd reason it does not have the horn on its head, the FIRST thing you should say is, "Well, show me the REAL unicorns so I can compare this thing to the real thing." And you won't be able to, because unicorns do not exist in the real world.
Neither does the virus.
ANYONE who wants to debate this MUST explain WHAT THE PROCESS IS to "find a virus."
I can explain it. Can YOU?
If YOU cannot do that, then YOU do not understand this subject -- just like these co-called "researchers."
Once you understand what a virologist ACTUALLY DOES -- the steps he goes through to "find a virus" -- then you will understand how the whole thing is made up.
This is one of the MOST IMPORTANT issues of our time.
This fraud is the ENTIRE BASIS OF TYRANNY. It is the reason for lockdown, face mask mandates, preventing you from having a job, buying groceries, traveling, and possibly soon to use your money for anything.
This lie MUST be understood.
Refusal to look into this subject is the same as accepting your own slavery.
Fren! This is fantastic. If you had a channel, or a like, subscribe, and/or a follow etc button - I'd hit em all. This reply of yours is phenomenal, but all I can give is a simple updoot.
Also, that might not actually "take," as I'm forever handshake lmao. But I tried to hit it for ya, anyway.
Yeah, I'm the perpetual "always stalker, never talker-" been either here, or voat b4 that and r/greatawakening before that. Annnnd.....I'm...
still....waiting...for justice lmao. But yeah, great analysis of what that paper meant for regular boots on the ground types, like me haha. Thx man 👍
Do you even understand what this is saying?
Read the "Lay Summary" of the acutal paper:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.18.512756v1
IOW: Something man-made
"In vitro" means in a lab, not inside a person or animal.
IOW: These DNA building blocks are CREATED in a lab.
HOW do they KNOW it is the "corect order?"
They MUST have an actual sample of the "real thing" from "the wild" to compare it to.
Do they state they DO HAVE this natural-occuring thing to compare this lab-made thing?
NO!
The do NOT have a REAL sample of a REAL "virus" to compare this man-made thing to.
Therefore, they do NOT know if the DNA is "stiched together in the correct order of the viral genome."
That's because the "viral genome" they are working with was MADE IN A COMPUTER, and NEVER TAKEN FROM A REAL "VIRUS."
Sure, that can show that SOMETHING was created in a lab.
But you still have to COMPARE IT TO THE REAL THING.
They DO NOT have the real thing -- and nobody ever has.
Why? Because the "real thing" has never existed.
They CREATED this thing they studied -- in a lab.
Then, they CONCLUDED that it was made in a lab!
WOW!
What a discovery!
If I tell you that this horse right here is the product of 2 unicorns mating, but for some odd reason it does not have the horn on its head, the FIRST thing you should say is, "Well, show me the REAL unicorns so I can compare this thing to the real thing." And you won't be able to, because unicorns do not exist in the real world.
But you can make an AI-generated computer image.
NOTE: Here, they are talking about the lab sample they got, not a "real" SARS-CoV-2 virus.
RIGHT !!!
Because the man-made SYNTHETIC "virus" is the ONLY thing that any lab has EVER studied.
ALL the samples to study are man-made!
NONE of them are from a REAL virus (because getting a sample of THAT is impossible).
And THIS is a claim they CANNOT PROVE.
WHERE is their "wild coronavirus" against which they can compare this sample?
THEY. DO. NOT. HAVE. ONE.
The ONLY thing they have here is a man-made thing, which has something in it that makes it obvious that it is man-made, and then they CLAIM this makes it different from the real thing.
Where is their CONTROL for this study?
Where is their PROOF that the REAL virus is different from this thing?
THEY. HAVE. NO. PROOF.
They just have a claim. Nothing more.
WRONG CONCLUSION.
Their findings strongly suggest that the PARTICULAR STUFF they are looking at was man-made -- because THEY made it!
Just look at the "Full Text" under "Materials and Methods."
They tell you right there HOW THEY MADE IT.
WHERE IS THEIR CONTROL?
WHERE IS THEIR DOCUMENTATION OF THE "REAL" VIRUS AND HOW IT DIFFERS FROM THIS STUFF?
The reality is that they used an INVALID method to "find" the virus, and then used computer models to "create" the DNA sequence.
They NEVER found the actual virus -- because nobody has, because it does not exist.
Once again, they offer ZERO PROOF that this thing is INFECTIOUS.
They just make the CLAIM and expect everyone to believe it.
So, the thing they are looking at has obvious signs that it was made in a lab.
So what?
That does NOT mean it is infectious. Where is their evidence for this claim?
THEY. HAVE. NONE.
Full Text - Introduction:
False. There is also a third hypothesis, that the researches themselves are using an INVALID method to "study the virus." They are NOT USING ANY CONTROLS to validate the results of their study.
They have no sample of the "real thing" to compare to.
They (a) create something in a lab, and then (b) conclude that this something was made in a lab.
Duh!
They also CLAIM it is infections, but offer ZERO PROOF of the claim.
If there is no control, then IT IS NOT VALID RESEARCH.
They basically ADMIT this with this sentence:
They "clone" by way of looking up the DNA sequence in a database -- but they don't tell you that this DNA sequence was NOT taken from the real thing.
The sequence, too, was MAN-MADE.
So, they take a man-made sequence from the database, and CREATE IN LAB something that has the sequence, and CLAIM it is the same as the "real thing."
But what they NEVER do ... is get a sample of the "real thing."
Because it does not exist in any lab anywhere in the world.
Weird ... for such a "deadly virus" ... huh?
ALL of this is manipulation IN THE LAB OF SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE REAL THING -- because nobody has the real thing.
Under their Methods section:
Do you guys realize how STUPID this statement is?
They are making a CLONE "from wild coronaviruses" ... by SYNTHESIZING (man-made in a lab) a copy of viral genome.
Why do they need to SYNTHESIZE it if they already have the REAL THING? Because they don't have the real thing.
So, they have to CREATE something in a lab and claim it is the real thing.
IOW: They create in a lab something which shows the same DNA profile as the DNA profile that was CREATED in a computer model, and never from a real thing.
IF they had the real thing, they would (a) take the real thing, then (b) add whatever Dr. Evil stuff they wanted to, and (c) produce the evil product.
That evil product could then be reverse-engineered to show that it had something added to it that could only come from a lab.
BUT ... they have to FIRST have the real thing, so they can use that as a control.
Instead, they just start with assumptions, make something in a lab, and then claim it means something.
The only "smoking gun" from this paper is that they NEVER had a REAL virus as a CONTROL so they could COMPARE this thing they were studying with the real thing.
And the reason they never had the real thing is because it does not exist.
The only things that has EVER been studied are these fake man-made concoctions that they CLAIM is the same as the real thing.
Well if it is, then PROVE it.
They never have. There is too much money -- and ego -- tied up in the deception.
ALL samples that are "studied" are of lab origin because the real thing has never existed.
Therefore, they also can NEVER show that the "real thing" is pathogenic or transmissible.
I also find it interesting that they do not even TRY to prove that this lab-created thing is either pathogenic or transmissible.
They only make the CLAIM, and expect the reader to accept it.
But nobody should accept a mere claim.
PROVE that even this lab-made thing is pathogenic or transmissible.
NOBODY WILL DO THAT.
Under "Materials and Metods" --
Notice, they did not say they bought a sample of SARS-CoV-2. Instead, they looked up the genome sequence and CREATED THEIR OWN SAMPLE TO STUDY.
What these "researchers" did was ...
In conclusion, this is GAW. That means: WAKE THE FUCK UP.
Again -- If I tell you that this horse right here is the product of 2 unicorns mating, but for some odd reason it does not have the horn on its head, the FIRST thing you should say is, "Well, show me the REAL unicorns so I can compare this thing to the real thing." And you won't be able to, because unicorns do not exist in the real world.
Neither does the virus.
ANYONE who wants to debate this MUST explain WHAT THE PROCESS IS to "find a virus."
I can explain it. Can YOU?
If YOU cannot do that, then YOU do not understand this subject -- just like these co-called "researchers."
Once you understand what a virologist ACTUALLY DOES -- the steps he goes through to "find a virus" -- then you will understand how the whole thing is made up.
This is one of the MOST IMPORTANT issues of our time.
This fraud is the ENTIRE BASIS OF TYRANNY. It is the reason for lockdown, face mask mandates, preventing you from having a job, buying groceries, traveling, and possibly soon to use your money for anything.
This lie MUST be understood.
Refusal to look into this subject is the same as accepting your own slavery.
Fren! This is fantastic. If you had a channel, or a like, subscribe, and/or a follow etc button - I'd hit em all. This reply of yours is phenomenal, but all I can give is a simple updoot. Also, that might not actually "take," as I'm forever handshake lmao. But I tried to hit it for ya, anyway.
Thx.
I updooted you, too.
Get rid of that handshake!
I think if you participate on other .win boards (just make normie comments), then your handshake goes away sooner.
Not positive that's how it works, but seems like I read that somewhere.
Yeah, I'm the perpetual "always stalker, never talker-" been either here, or voat b4 that and r/greatawakening before that. Annnnd.....I'm... still....waiting...for justice lmao. But yeah, great analysis of what that paper meant for regular boots on the ground types, like me haha. Thx man 👍
Oh and thx for the make "stupid normie comments on rando threads" ttp man, lmao, good shit