This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing that these unevidenced claims have merit in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits good evidence, evdidence that has teeth and would otherwise be convincing, by association.

Whether you realize it or not, whether it is true or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence and addressing the specifics of why this works for everything else, but not for viruses) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing that these unevidenced claims have merit in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits good evidence, evdidence that has teeth and would otherwise be convincing, by association.

Whether you realize it or not, whether it is true or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence and addressing the specifics of why this works for everything else, but not for viruses) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing that these unevidenced claims have merit in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits good evidence, evdidence that has teeth and would otherwise be convincing, by association.

Whether you realize it or not, whether it is true or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing that these unevidenced claims have merit in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits good evidence, evdidence that has teeth and would otherwise be convincing, by association.

Whether you realize it or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing that these unevidenced claims have merit in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits good evidence, evdidence that has teeth and would otherwise be convincing by association.

Whether you realize it or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing these unevidenced claims have merit in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits good evidence, evdidence that has teeth and would otherwise be convincing by association.

Whether you realize it or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing these unevidenced claims have merit in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits evidence that has teeth by association. Whether you realize it or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you are wrong." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing the protests in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits evidence that has teeth by association. Whether you realize it or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."

This is what Controlled Opposition looks like.

[People have been] seeking records that describe the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.

What does it mean "any unadulterated sample"? By what measure? How exactly do you propose to isolate anything (cell fractionate, and get to and sequence the viral RNA) without using, you know, actual biochemistry? Should we get out our little tweezers and then manually go through, with our fingers, each little nucleotide? Even if we could do that, is that sufficiently "unadulterated?" The methods by which these things are done are the same methods we do all the other isolations. Not just viral, but protein, or organelle, etc. This is how things are done.

The reason: without the crucial step of isolation/purification having been performed (from many patients, followed by characterization, sequencing and controlled experiments), there is no way to claim scientifically that the alleged “novel coronavirus”

This is a claim made without evidence. The authors of this work (and others like it) are making the claim that "if you don't do 'this', you can't say 'that'." People who haven't done years of schooling and who haven't done all these tests in an actual lab don't understand what is really involved in the "this" part of the claim (the required steps in the tests). They also don't then understand the "that" part (what science is).

Science is a tiered process. It builds upon itself. The isolation techniques of cell fractionation and genome sequencing are complicated, but not to someone who has done them. They are based upon decades and decades of techniques that led up to the systems we have. They are used for everything, and they work very well in all other uses. The claim is that they don't work for viruses. The claim is made without any evidential support.

What Science isn't, is a "claim." PEOPLE make claims. Science is just a process. A process of probabilities, a process of model making, a regimented testing process. Science can't tell you what the truth is (that is outside of it's design capacity), but it is a very useful process.

In the case of the isolation techniques, they have proven very useful in the past. The ideas that they can't be used to isolate a virus are ludicrous. Anyone who makes such claims never gives reasons that address any particular problem. They only state "look, you are using not human parts for human things, thus you have no idea." OK, maybe, but your protest will have to be a whole lot more specific than that to be taken seriously.

And if a protest can't be taken seriously by anyone who has experience in these techniques, and then people go around believing the protests in their ignorance, it makes those in "opposition" look like idiots. This discredits evidence that has teeth by association. Whether you realize it or not, by espousing this shit (without a whole lot more evidence) you are not only unwitting Controlled Opposition yourself, you make all the really good evidence out there not be looked at because you fall into the category of "crazy conspiracy theorist."