In that long interview of Mullis done by Gary Null, Mullis insists on being against "belief." He, like almost everyone else, seems to be of the belief that scientists do not believe anything and do not have opinions. They focus on the data, which is to say, on measurement.
This is what some critics see as a satirical depiction of Isaac Newton by William Blake, from 1795, the age of revolutions. The scientist is so focused on the objectivity and precision of his measuring that he forgets he is naked. The entire reality of nature passes by his side, and leaves him untouched. All his might is focused on the reality of his tools, and everything else is irrelevant.
Is PCR amplification real or not?
Google maps, and others, do a nasty trick. I consider it nasty.
When you see a street or anything else on the map, you are allowed to zoom in, or out. This does two different things: one, it can stretch pictures to make them look bigger, to see "details", as if you were using a magnification lens on a painting. This process does not add information. But it changes the information, because the zoomed sections receive the effect of "smoothing" filters, because pixelation looks ugly.
The other thing they do is different. They bring more information for greater detail. Not a magnification of a defective raster graphics picture. As you move on the map, the computer adds information, from a database, adjusted to the level of the detail you are requesting, and only if the database has that information available. This should not be called "zoom" because it is not magnification but aggregation of information.
What PCR does is make copies of "genetic material." Let's remember that "genetic material" is only a chemical product. Any meaning we impose on genetic material is our own mind trying to fool us. The magnification of this genetic material may or may not allow to "see" (abusing language here) real details of the chemical in question.
Assuming that the magnification process does not add or subtract information from the genetic material, the multiple copies of if perhaps allow, perhaps, to measure things that are very difficult to measure using the small sample. But logic says that you can only be certain that the new measurements done on the amplified genetic material coincide with the original sample if, and only if, you have the original measurements on the original sample, to compare.
And now we have a tool to obsess about, like Blake's Newton and his compass and roll of paper.
Because if you know (belief, belief, belief...) by measuring X, Y and Z facts on very many small samples of genetic material, and you also measure exactly X, Y and Z on the corresponding amplified samples, then you are very tempted to say: "Hey, the next time someone brings me a small sample of genetic material, I'm going to go directly to the thermal-cycler, and start the amplification right away, and I'll measure my X, Y and Z on the amplified material, and then simply proclaim that the original sample also has X, Y and Z. And I can do this because the PCR method has been found to be ultra precise and reliable. So we are allowed to jump to conclusions safely."
This is what is really happening, and it is irrational. And yet it may also be correct: the result may be a perfect replica of the original, even though you have not gone through the awful work of looking at the original thoroughly. And you cannot be "certain" because you cannot compare. You've done a beautiful leap of faith, disguised as precise measurement of something objectively true.
And the charlatans who rule us got wind of this. And it was relatively easy, once the undue prestige of Science and its modern tools was established, to fool everyone, including students of biology and medicine, into the complete absurdity of having amplification with addition of information from incomplete samples. Obviously, the added information, generated by the PCR process, cannot be compared with the original full sample because it was an incomplete sample.
But impossibilities don't discourage charlatans.
Another thing, totally different from what the charlatans have done, is the mystical approach.
That information that was not there is actually identical to the newly created information added by the PCR. Because MAGIC. Or because, for some unknown reason, the incomplete pieces of genetic material have a bias. A meaning inside them, independent of the tricks of our minds. It is possible, then, to rebuild life, from incomplete pieces, because life is fundamentally redundant and fractal.
I think this is only mystical. Or mathematical. Not natural.
Incomplete genetic material cannot regenerate exactly its lost parts. Not on its own, not by a chain reaction. The added information is likely to be dysfunctional and different than whatever was there. And I take this conclusion on faith, not on fact. I don't even believe that life can be reduced only to genetic material.
What do scientists like Mullis really believed? Well, I don't know. I do know that lots of religions and beliefs and weird thoughts have been created in California in the 20th century. All seem to be linked to espionage and crime, by the way.
Most likely, the charlatans simply use the weird irrational stuff of the mystics and drug users to create impossible data, with which they steal money and power from everyone. People are in awe, due to ignorance. Charlatans are greedy. They don't need truth or violence. They only need fear to convince people to submit and those will force others to submit.
Correctly used, logic can destroy all frauds, and expose all charlatans.
But this is too much certainty.
People see certainty as arrogance. You are not allowed to be arrogance in this plantation, slave!
Yet, truth is truth: a learned scientist, a crazy man and a powerful king can all agree on that. And all three will try to destroy each other, for different reasons. Not for truth, but for their emotions.
So this is my critique. It's not that they are not doing science right, withing the boundaries of logic, but that they believe that logic is not a boundary of science. They were educated that way. The falsification of science was part of the plan all along.
So logic only applies when it is convenient for Power. Otherwise, it's an epidemic of gaslighting.
I also find the same crazy shit in quantum theory.
The double slit experiment makes no sense, yet it's their biggest "proof" of the idea.
Like PCR, it fails at step one of the magical result they saw.
How do you measure where the photons are going without disturbing them? It's not the "observer" that changed the result, but the detector itself that changes things.
Also funny is that I misremembered that you get two lines or the pattern. A friend read more and said no, it's one line OR the diffraction wave pattern.
So, my memory of two lines was actually what should have happened if the magic they believe in is true.. but the result makes the case that a detector can influence things and the idea of an invisible detector is another logical fallacy!
Oh and people like to say that quantum theory was used to invent GPS and other fancy things. Nope... That's based on the periodic clock of decay.
No need for bullshit magic to invent the high tech stuff we have today.
Physicists flipped my wig with their quantum eraser! I used to follow their developments, but now it is a Mad Hatter's tea party. And, let's not talk about branes.
And after ALL THAT, I'm not sure I am really understanding what you're trying to say. I do think there is a LOT of very dodgy thinking, and yes, meant to be that way, because... it a crude way of putting it, Money.
What I am saying, what I thought I did say, is that the PCR is not meant for diagnosis of any disease. Yes, it's for amplification. Genetic material and "chemicals" are pretty broad terms, but there is no "finding disease" and there is no DIAGNOSIS, as the Nasties keep telling us, with their graphene-coated nasal swabs that scrape the top of the inside of your SKULL!!!!!! No, I'm exaggerating. But I didn't make my initial comment in order to GASLIGHT anybody, I was simply putting the idea into simple terms for anybody who doesn't have a degree in science... Tell 'im, Rob c. ;)
I am not trying to GASLIGHT anybody. I'm simply saying what Mullis said about his own tool, and if I got it wrong, just tell me how, simply, not with looooooong tales of ... what.
Whereas, as I read it, Rob is saying PCR is not much good for anything including amplification either...how to amplify something you cannot first identify before you amplify it. Then how do you know that result is in fact an amplication of the thing you can't identify in the first place.
It's one of those things that even some of my most aware friends didn't understand.
I guess we assume that everything is perfectly digital in this age.
But all of that PCR stuff is actually analog chemical reactions which are being assumed to create perfect copies. As running more cycles creates artifacts, it shows that it's not a perfect copy. If it's not perfect, how do we know at what point this or that is inaccurate?
I suspect this is why DNA is also so grey despite claiming to be absolute. It's a valid defense to explain that DNA matching has errors in court.
I suppose this is like PCR, where interpretation done by the software or chemical process can be off, giving false positive matches.
I don’t need to argue about this, it’s just not that big of a deal, except that this PCR is being fraudulently used to “identify” a fraudulent disease so people will be frightened enough to have a FRAUDULENT INJECTION that might end up killing them. So, we can stop arguing. Kerry Mullis is with the angels now and surely won’t object. ^_^
My friend, this comment was not a comment about your comment and I don't remember accusing you of gaslighting anyone. I think you misread it.
I've been told before by people that they need a dictionary and a map to read my comments. I blame my natal Moon in Gemini.
I tend to write tomes. I shouldn't. Maybe I'll stop tome-writing. Who cares about tomes, anyway.
The PCR was a key aspect of this psychological operation. Tons of people still believe it was real. It's amazing how deeply can hypnosis scar millions of people.
And it seems that hypnosis has a lot to do with confirmation bias and trauma. For example, people who believe in graphene nanobots controlling the human body at the level of the capillaries will never stop believing in that demon and fear it, even if the actual surveillance technology has nothing to do with it. A pure fantasy that protects the reality of what they are doing. Just like viruses.
It's the paranoia of parasites with a dash of the perfume of solipsism. Also, internet trolls just love to abuse fearful people. It happens all the time. A lot of people just can never truly examine their own conscience.
I appreciate your relating this to pixelation. That is a relatable frame of reference for many! I made artworks about this subject (which contains others); if you like to see them? Let me know. I appreciate your critique a lot.
So... Because of all the fuckery, the PCR is pretty much universally misunderstood. The PCR test is a shortcut, cheaper way of taking an educated GUESS... It isn't meant to diagnose, or "find" anything, as Mullis insisted repeatedly, but after he dissed Fauci many times, he died suddenly, of a heart attack, in Sept. of 2019... after repeatedly insulting the intelligence and character of Anthony Fauci.
The PCR test, according to Tom Cowan, MD, in his book "The Contagion Myth," explains it like this:
The PCR, among other tests, is a *surrogate* test, which is much cheaper to use, and which "does not look for what you need to find, but rather for something likely to be there if the condition is present... The surrogate test allows doctors to make an educated guess." But accuracy is not part of the process. It's a SHORTCUT that might LEAD TO using a more expensive test, it seems.
So-- because of various factors like COST and DIFFICULTY, the PCR was widely used... but NOT for diagnosis or "finding" a virus... Not ever. It's not a "gold standard" test, but a CLUE-giving one, IF it works the way it should, which is to sort of point a finger.
Again, according to Dr. Cowan, "Kary Mullis... has insisted, time and time again, PCR tests do not prove causation and cannot diagnose illness."
From everything else I've read, this is an accurate description of the PCR test. I've read much the same kind of explanation in many different places, I just happen to have Cowan's book.
So-- you're sort of right, lol. (I feel strongly that Fauci had Mullis "offed.")
The PCR was used because the corporate Hoffman Laroche made billions from licensing the right to it's use.
It's like those obscene profits made from manufacturing the mechanical ventilators by GM and Ford. Somebody knew they were going to be pushed since before 2007. The share pricing and cost per unit kept increasing like crazy. I took a dive into that and was astounded. We were ripped off big time.
I take it you're talking about PCR use during the "Covid" fraud?
YES, I agree. But the PCR was invented way before that, and was used as a STEP before going ahead with a test that was FAR more expensive. Maybe I should have mentioned that the PCR test was invented in 1985, and Mullis won a Nobel in Chemistry in the mid 90's.
There is no "diagnostic" test. And they never isolated the virus to give us the artificially derived genomic sequence from China. Not into being gaslighted.
Are you talking to me? SS links things wrongly, a lot... This comment of yours came to my inbox, but I will assume you're not talking to me, because I didn't SAY the PCR is a "diagnorstic test." It isn't. Not gaslighting anybody.
Jeez. Don't blame the dead man for the misuse. He even said that it's not a diagnostic "test".
It would more appropriately be called an assay device imo. Its like doing a chemical analysis of a rock. You can get the elements but without other studies it may never tell you much. Like rocks made of carbon. Diamonds or coal?
Even with low cycles you have to question the use. Take the Remdesivir and Ebola drug trials New England Journal of Medicine article. Did Fauci, whose signature signed off on the trial, ever confirm that the so called control group determined at low cycle threshold actually had Ebola? Did all of them die of Ebola?
It was one of the reasons I called bullshit early in looking at the CDC hospital report form of COVID-19 deaths.
Tested? Y/N. Was it Positive? Y/N.
No data on cycle thresholds nor which company test was used. Data had no reliability to be used in analysis and Fauci had to have known. It's likely been done deliberately to falsify the death counts. In this military operation it was just like generals who oversaw the death counts of "enemy" in Vietnam. Took practice to count the murder of non combatants in an illegal unconstitutional undeclared "war" to show how successful the campaign was going.
Never did look and see for example if the wholesale massacre of civilians at My Lai were classified as enemy combatants. I just knew from a self medicating ex marine that it wasn't the only time it happened.
Free Julian Assange. Truth is necessary for government accountability.
I must remember to put people's NAMES in my comments, as there is sooooo much bad linkage. I do wish SS could get it together, and it's ALWAYS been this way, since I got here, at least. smh
And my comment below was meant for YOU, but linked to Rob c !!!!
What an insane thing, SS. Do they do this on purpose?? ^_^
we can save a few ..i print easy mini flyers from this site called LuckyDay and i put on cars tape to gas pumps, slip into convid test and mask boxes. im still handing to masked souls 4 yrs out !
Beautiful words, but are you saying you are homeless? of course having comfortable shelter a home is a human need. They cannot take your soul or anyones soul,. they can only control and "win"by lying and deceit propaganda. So I dont call that winning- winning implies a fair game- Most in govt do not know they are deceiving working for the enemy "elite" aka . but those that do know, are their souls really at peace? learning that virus do not exist was personally liberating, I will never be giving big pharma or any doctor one penny for as long as I live. Of course this Truth comes with the double edged sword called pain of knowing because those we love most wont listen to us and the pain of being fooled. So we must be strong enough to handle watching the needless/deliberate imposed suffering by Big Pharma meds
You are not alone, if you have $5 per month, Dr Cowans Community you will find friends.
or Dr. Sam Baileys community too..., I put out mini flyers called LuckyDay from www.VirusTruth.NET everyday 20-30, its my FU to Big Pharma -its my therapy- I cannot surrender, and I sleep better at night bec doing nothing assures failure, vs 50/50 shot (pun intended) I get someone to get off the vaccine hamsterwheel. If not, I consider them warned and I feel better not sitting on the info- putting it out , planting seeds
Great post! I am still shocked by the amount of people that are going and getting "tested" for "covid" (or any other flu/cold like illness!). The human race survived for a long time without getting "tested" for colds. My mom and my grandmother had their own "PCR" tests! Hand on the forehead... yep, you've got a fever. Are you coughing? Yep. Do you feel achy and tired? Yep. Well... (drum roll please).... you've got a cold or the flu. Time to get some rest, drink some water and stay home from school/work. Somehow, this method of testing has gone by the wayside, even though it's 100 times more accurate than all of these fake fear tests. I will NOT be tested. (Not to mention, that if a person goes and gets an "official" "test" for a cold/flu they are put into a government database). Good grief people, wake the F up!
The other time, I wasn't sick, but got positive. That week, the others who had to test got positive too, even though they work in different buildings and different shifts.
That week, my girlfriend's sister tested positive, but she lived an hour away.
I guess that week they pumped up the amplification and got many false positives.
The crazy thing about PCR is that if many cycles of amplification can bring false positives, it means that every copy step introduces "artifacts".
So I don't see how this tool is accurate or useful at all, even when used for it's "intended purpose'!
How do you know there's any testing at all? May be an algorithm that random picks from the set?
Assume that the PCR was finding the virus. Now, the virus has morphed but it will still have some of its past signature. PCR should then find the virus even though it has evolved.
Now, assume the PCR is finding nothing. Then how does it decide that something is positive? It is randomly saying yes or no. If this is the case, why bother with anything else other than writing a program that spits out either yes or no.
It's USEFUL because the SWAB has graphene on it, and it goes right up near your brain so you can't sneeze it out. Graphene is hideously Not Good, and combined with EMF's can cause a LOT of problems, including blood clots, according to Ricard Delgado, head guy at La Quinta Columna, the Spanish Laboratory that was first to look at what exactly was in those vials of Jab Juice that Pfizer put out... Graphene, according to LQC, will naturally detox from the body after about a month, and that's why they want you to have "boosters." Pretty gnarly shit.
Mullis has been thoroughly outed as a fraud, 100 times over. Anyone still clinging onto him as some sort of hero or truth teller at this point is either incredibly gullible or gatekeeping.
Hey Rob, with all due respect, you really need to "read the room" and do some catching up on the truth about Kary Mullis. It's no longer a secret.
I was actually THERE in our old "AIDS" dissident movement. I MET Mullis- a FEW TIMES, actually, and most notably, I actually helped to PRODUCE the actual seminar where Mullis made some comments way back in 1997 in front of a red brick wall which continue to be MISINTERPRETED by well-meaning (and maybe NOT so "well-meaning") dissidents of the present day.
Learning how Mullis behaved in our old "AIDS" dissident movement IS important because we need to stay vigilant against such behavior in this current dissident movement!
"I wonder if he realized that his invention was broken from the beginning"
He's one of the fake heroes the blob makes all the time, it's made as a deception and he is the face of it, just like Musk, Gates, etc. Same game plan.
I am trying to understand the issue here, so pardon me if I am thick.
The premise of PCR is to amplify DNA materials. And you are wondering [a] if all material is amplified in the same ratio [b] the DNA is not getting split up and joining back to show up as something else (a la Saddam combining with his dog in Hot Shots Deux, the movie)? Are there other potential issues that you are thinking about not listed above?
My issue is that the copying, or amplification is assumed to be perfect. It's not, because it's based on a primer reaction. They're basically using a reaction to copy the same pool over and over because the original pool is too small to measure whether a sequence is inside it.
If you can't measure something before copying it, how are you sure if the copy is same as the original?
In the digital world numbers are absolute and copies are identical. However PCR has the same issue that analog copies have... When you run more and more cycles you'll find false positives. That means the copy of the copy etc ends up with random noise, aka it's not ever an exact copy...
Surely, they ran some controlled tests where they knew what the inputs were and then tested if the outputs matched the inputs in more or less the same fractions? They could have even run tests where they went the other way by first predicting on test samples and then checking if the inputs matched. The first will be to predict probabilities conditioned on inputs and the second will be to predict probabilities conditioned on outputs. If they both match, one can apply Bayes formula. And that would be the basis of PCR test if they really did all that.
True but the tell is where if they run more and more cycles they find everything. Kary Mullis joked that if you look deep enough you'll find everything in the Buddhist sense.
My issue with PCR is that if copies of copies start creating artifacts, it's an analog copy and not digital "bit perfect" as the geneticists act.
It's like copying a copy of a VCR tape, every time you copy a copy it gets more noise.
Meanwhile copying a mp4 video file is identical no matter how many times you copy it.
Your logic is a breath of fresh air especially when compared to omar jordon's take down of DNA along the lines of "because you can't see it it doesn't exist"
Sheesh, that would not satisfy me. That's why I still believed in DNA until recently, as we see how the measurement of it is based on an arbitrary choice of markers.
You have misinterpreted what Kary Mullis said. I can't find the video now, but it should still be widely available. If you listen to his own words he advises against using it as a test for anything. That's not what it's designed for.
I'm going to write a slightly critical comment. Buckle up.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/h59i4ABgVZDJ/
Go to 01:18:00
In that long interview of Mullis done by Gary Null, Mullis insists on being against "belief." He, like almost everyone else, seems to be of the belief that scientists do not believe anything and do not have opinions. They focus on the data, which is to say, on measurement.
See this picture: https://adeptinitiates.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Newton-1.jpg
This is what some critics see as a satirical depiction of Isaac Newton by William Blake, from 1795, the age of revolutions. The scientist is so focused on the objectivity and precision of his measuring that he forgets he is naked. The entire reality of nature passes by his side, and leaves him untouched. All his might is focused on the reality of his tools, and everything else is irrelevant.
Is PCR amplification real or not?
Google maps, and others, do a nasty trick. I consider it nasty.
When you see a street or anything else on the map, you are allowed to zoom in, or out. This does two different things: one, it can stretch pictures to make them look bigger, to see "details", as if you were using a magnification lens on a painting. This process does not add information. But it changes the information, because the zoomed sections receive the effect of "smoothing" filters, because pixelation looks ugly.
The other thing they do is different. They bring more information for greater detail. Not a magnification of a defective raster graphics picture. As you move on the map, the computer adds information, from a database, adjusted to the level of the detail you are requesting, and only if the database has that information available. This should not be called "zoom" because it is not magnification but aggregation of information.
What PCR does is make copies of "genetic material." Let's remember that "genetic material" is only a chemical product. Any meaning we impose on genetic material is our own mind trying to fool us. The magnification of this genetic material may or may not allow to "see" (abusing language here) real details of the chemical in question.
Assuming that the magnification process does not add or subtract information from the genetic material, the multiple copies of if perhaps allow, perhaps, to measure things that are very difficult to measure using the small sample. But logic says that you can only be certain that the new measurements done on the amplified genetic material coincide with the original sample if, and only if, you have the original measurements on the original sample, to compare.
And now we have a tool to obsess about, like Blake's Newton and his compass and roll of paper.
Because if you know (belief, belief, belief...) by measuring X, Y and Z facts on very many small samples of genetic material, and you also measure exactly X, Y and Z on the corresponding amplified samples, then you are very tempted to say: "Hey, the next time someone brings me a small sample of genetic material, I'm going to go directly to the thermal-cycler, and start the amplification right away, and I'll measure my X, Y and Z on the amplified material, and then simply proclaim that the original sample also has X, Y and Z. And I can do this because the PCR method has been found to be ultra precise and reliable. So we are allowed to jump to conclusions safely."
This is what is really happening, and it is irrational. And yet it may also be correct: the result may be a perfect replica of the original, even though you have not gone through the awful work of looking at the original thoroughly. And you cannot be "certain" because you cannot compare. You've done a beautiful leap of faith, disguised as precise measurement of something objectively true.
And the charlatans who rule us got wind of this. And it was relatively easy, once the undue prestige of Science and its modern tools was established, to fool everyone, including students of biology and medicine, into the complete absurdity of having amplification with addition of information from incomplete samples. Obviously, the added information, generated by the PCR process, cannot be compared with the original full sample because it was an incomplete sample.
But impossibilities don't discourage charlatans.
Another thing, totally different from what the charlatans have done, is the mystical approach.
That information that was not there is actually identical to the newly created information added by the PCR. Because MAGIC. Or because, for some unknown reason, the incomplete pieces of genetic material have a bias. A meaning inside them, independent of the tricks of our minds. It is possible, then, to rebuild life, from incomplete pieces, because life is fundamentally redundant and fractal.
I think this is only mystical. Or mathematical. Not natural.
Incomplete genetic material cannot regenerate exactly its lost parts. Not on its own, not by a chain reaction. The added information is likely to be dysfunctional and different than whatever was there. And I take this conclusion on faith, not on fact. I don't even believe that life can be reduced only to genetic material.
What do scientists like Mullis really believed? Well, I don't know. I do know that lots of religions and beliefs and weird thoughts have been created in California in the 20th century. All seem to be linked to espionage and crime, by the way.
Most likely, the charlatans simply use the weird irrational stuff of the mystics and drug users to create impossible data, with which they steal money and power from everyone. People are in awe, due to ignorance. Charlatans are greedy. They don't need truth or violence. They only need fear to convince people to submit and those will force others to submit.
Correctly used, logic can destroy all frauds, and expose all charlatans.
But this is too much certainty.
People see certainty as arrogance. You are not allowed to be arrogance in this plantation, slave!
Yet, truth is truth: a learned scientist, a crazy man and a powerful king can all agree on that. And all three will try to destroy each other, for different reasons. Not for truth, but for their emotions.
So this is my critique. It's not that they are not doing science right, withing the boundaries of logic, but that they believe that logic is not a boundary of science. They were educated that way. The falsification of science was part of the plan all along.
So logic only applies when it is convenient for Power. Otherwise, it's an epidemic of gaslighting.
Perfect point!
I also find the same crazy shit in quantum theory.
The double slit experiment makes no sense, yet it's their biggest "proof" of the idea.
Like PCR, it fails at step one of the magical result they saw.
How do you measure where the photons are going without disturbing them? It's not the "observer" that changed the result, but the detector itself that changes things.
Also funny is that I misremembered that you get two lines or the pattern. A friend read more and said no, it's one line OR the diffraction wave pattern.
So, my memory of two lines was actually what should have happened if the magic they believe in is true.. but the result makes the case that a detector can influence things and the idea of an invisible detector is another logical fallacy!
Oh and people like to say that quantum theory was used to invent GPS and other fancy things. Nope... That's based on the periodic clock of decay.
No need for bullshit magic to invent the high tech stuff we have today.
simple site to share www.VirusTruth.net
Physicists flipped my wig with their quantum eraser! I used to follow their developments, but now it is a Mad Hatter's tea party. And, let's not talk about branes.
That's a long freakin comment. lol
And after ALL THAT, I'm not sure I am really understanding what you're trying to say. I do think there is a LOT of very dodgy thinking, and yes, meant to be that way, because... it a crude way of putting it, Money.
What I am saying, what I thought I did say, is that the PCR is not meant for diagnosis of any disease. Yes, it's for amplification. Genetic material and "chemicals" are pretty broad terms, but there is no "finding disease" and there is no DIAGNOSIS, as the Nasties keep telling us, with their graphene-coated nasal swabs that scrape the top of the inside of your SKULL!!!!!! No, I'm exaggerating. But I didn't make my initial comment in order to GASLIGHT anybody, I was simply putting the idea into simple terms for anybody who doesn't have a degree in science... Tell 'im, Rob c. ;)
I am not trying to GASLIGHT anybody. I'm simply saying what Mullis said about his own tool, and if I got it wrong, just tell me how, simply, not with looooooong tales of ... what.
Whereas, as I read it, Rob is saying PCR is not much good for anything including amplification either...how to amplify something you cannot first identify before you amplify it. Then how do you know that result is in fact an amplication of the thing you can't identify in the first place.
Thank you for understanding.
It's one of those things that even some of my most aware friends didn't understand.
I guess we assume that everything is perfectly digital in this age.
But all of that PCR stuff is actually analog chemical reactions which are being assumed to create perfect copies. As running more cycles creates artifacts, it shows that it's not a perfect copy. If it's not perfect, how do we know at what point this or that is inaccurate?
I suspect this is why DNA is also so grey despite claiming to be absolute. It's a valid defense to explain that DNA matching has errors in court.
I suppose this is like PCR, where interpretation done by the software or chemical process can be off, giving false positive matches.
I don’t need to argue about this, it’s just not that big of a deal, except that this PCR is being fraudulently used to “identify” a fraudulent disease so people will be frightened enough to have a FRAUDULENT INJECTION that might end up killing them. So, we can stop arguing. Kerry Mullis is with the angels now and surely won’t object. ^_^
My friend, this comment was not a comment about your comment and I don't remember accusing you of gaslighting anyone. I think you misread it.
I've been told before by people that they need a dictionary and a map to read my comments. I blame my natal Moon in Gemini.
I tend to write tomes. I shouldn't. Maybe I'll stop tome-writing. Who cares about tomes, anyway.
The PCR was a key aspect of this psychological operation. Tons of people still believe it was real. It's amazing how deeply can hypnosis scar millions of people.
And it seems that hypnosis has a lot to do with confirmation bias and trauma. For example, people who believe in graphene nanobots controlling the human body at the level of the capillaries will never stop believing in that demon and fear it, even if the actual surveillance technology has nothing to do with it. A pure fantasy that protects the reality of what they are doing. Just like viruses.
It's the paranoia of parasites with a dash of the perfume of solipsism. Also, internet trolls just love to abuse fearful people. It happens all the time. A lot of people just can never truly examine their own conscience.
LOL Okay, SS, this is for Roger 23:
I wrote that b/c SS linked STEPHEN's comment to ME, and then linked my comment to YOU... I must say this is confusing.
It's all good. I'm not mortified, or even irritated.
Keep writing tomes please. 🐝
I appreciate your relating this to pixelation. That is a relatable frame of reference for many! I made artworks about this subject (which contains others); if you like to see them? Let me know. I appreciate your critique a lot.
So... Because of all the fuckery, the PCR is pretty much universally misunderstood. The PCR test is a shortcut, cheaper way of taking an educated GUESS... It isn't meant to diagnose, or "find" anything, as Mullis insisted repeatedly, but after he dissed Fauci many times, he died suddenly, of a heart attack, in Sept. of 2019... after repeatedly insulting the intelligence and character of Anthony Fauci.
The PCR test, according to Tom Cowan, MD, in his book "The Contagion Myth," explains it like this:
The PCR, among other tests, is a *surrogate* test, which is much cheaper to use, and which "does not look for what you need to find, but rather for something likely to be there if the condition is present... The surrogate test allows doctors to make an educated guess." But accuracy is not part of the process. It's a SHORTCUT that might LEAD TO using a more expensive test, it seems.
So-- because of various factors like COST and DIFFICULTY, the PCR was widely used... but NOT for diagnosis or "finding" a virus... Not ever. It's not a "gold standard" test, but a CLUE-giving one, IF it works the way it should, which is to sort of point a finger.
Again, according to Dr. Cowan, "Kary Mullis... has insisted, time and time again, PCR tests do not prove causation and cannot diagnose illness."
From everything else I've read, this is an accurate description of the PCR test. I've read much the same kind of explanation in many different places, I just happen to have Cowan's book.
So-- you're sort of right, lol. (I feel strongly that Fauci had Mullis "offed.")
Yeah I'm basically saying the invention for what it is supposed to do is crazy delusional illogical shit lol.
Like that example of enhancing a blurry dot in a picture to see a face.
Well, OK.
What I'm saying is that you MIGHT be misunderstanding it, and what it was for.
It's not going to ruin my day, and since Mullis is dead now, it won't ruin his, either.
The PCR was used because the corporate Hoffman Laroche made billions from licensing the right to it's use.
It's like those obscene profits made from manufacturing the mechanical ventilators by GM and Ford. Somebody knew they were going to be pushed since before 2007. The share pricing and cost per unit kept increasing like crazy. I took a dive into that and was astounded. We were ripped off big time.
I take it you're talking about PCR use during the "Covid" fraud?
YES, I agree. But the PCR was invented way before that, and was used as a STEP before going ahead with a test that was FAR more expensive. Maybe I should have mentioned that the PCR test was invented in 1985, and Mullis won a Nobel in Chemistry in the mid 90's.
There is no "diagnostic" test. And they never isolated the virus to give us the artificially derived genomic sequence from China. Not into being gaslighted.
Are you talking to me? SS links things wrongly, a lot... This comment of yours came to my inbox, but I will assume you're not talking to me, because I didn't SAY the PCR is a "diagnorstic test." It isn't. Not gaslighting anybody.
Jeez. Don't blame the dead man for the misuse. He even said that it's not a diagnostic "test".
It would more appropriately be called an assay device imo. Its like doing a chemical analysis of a rock. You can get the elements but without other studies it may never tell you much. Like rocks made of carbon. Diamonds or coal?
Yeah, but even the "normal use" is crazy.
Copying things via a chemical process and assuming that the copies are perfect is the issue.
That's why high cycles leads to bullshit results which he joked about as seeing everything in nothing.
Even with low cycles you have to question the use. Take the Remdesivir and Ebola drug trials New England Journal of Medicine article. Did Fauci, whose signature signed off on the trial, ever confirm that the so called control group determined at low cycle threshold actually had Ebola? Did all of them die of Ebola?
It was one of the reasons I called bullshit early in looking at the CDC hospital report form of COVID-19 deaths.
Tested? Y/N. Was it Positive? Y/N.
No data on cycle thresholds nor which company test was used. Data had no reliability to be used in analysis and Fauci had to have known. It's likely been done deliberately to falsify the death counts. In this military operation it was just like generals who oversaw the death counts of "enemy" in Vietnam. Took practice to count the murder of non combatants in an illegal unconstitutional undeclared "war" to show how successful the campaign was going.
Never did look and see for example if the wholesale massacre of civilians at My Lai were classified as enemy combatants. I just knew from a self medicating ex marine that it wasn't the only time it happened.
Free Julian Assange. Truth is necessary for government accountability.
THIS COMMENT is meant for Stephen V.
I must remember to put people's NAMES in my comments, as there is sooooo much bad linkage. I do wish SS could get it together, and it's ALWAYS been this way, since I got here, at least. smh
And my comment below was meant for YOU, but linked to Rob c !!!!
What an insane thing, SS. Do they do this on purpose?? ^_^
Yeah, I agree with you. I was never DISagreeing. :)
Maya: measure
Illusion
The Measure of A Man...The Illusion
How much? HOw big? How little? How many? How strong? How weak? How hot? HOw cold?
The Split
Way to Rule Method of Domination....the measure of power and control...money, sex, and power
Boys will be Boys and Must Have Their Toys
And He with the Most Technological Toys
WINS
until the only Winner
Death
comes to call
It's a big club
I was invited
I walked away
Either way
They'll make you pay
and pay and pay and pay
anyway
They Are The Masters
The Masters of War
At some point everyone has the same toys.
The ones who used to always win with the best toys start crying and want their mommy 😂
take a trip through time, leave them all behind, laugh and cry and reach the sky
a gift of lightness to you, from I
https://bluelectricstormlaughingwaters.substack.com/p/a-tale-of-two-times?publication_id=1351114&post_id=142538786&isFreemail=false&r=1b8sp2&triedRedirect=true&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
www.VirusTruth.net
we can save a few ..i print easy mini flyers from this site called LuckyDay and i put on cars tape to gas pumps, slip into convid test and mask boxes. im still handing to masked souls 4 yrs out !
we need more activists to break this spell...
Carry on. After being isolated and despised for twenty years of looking at the sky,
and telling what I see, how it's hurting you and me
No one cared you see, they're running after money
And they have homes and I have nothing
And they won, And I know only defeat.
Truth is a cheap friend
Who will leave you all alone
While the laughing liars who rule your life
Scorn you in their fondle phones
Where spells of spelling lead them
Far away from home
Where no one cares who or where
And every one is a lone.
So if you know some one that loves you
Some one whom you love in kind
Hang on to that for dear dear life
Don't let faithless truth create a fight
Or a rift, or a split
Because the truth today will die tomorrow
With a newer truth revealed
So look to love, for truth can never
A damaged heart heal
For love lives in wishes, in dreams, and desires
And the waterfall of truth
Will only kill the fire
For love is blind to the light of truth
And only seeks the mercy
of blindness from infinity
Beautiful words, but are you saying you are homeless? of course having comfortable shelter a home is a human need. They cannot take your soul or anyones soul,. they can only control and "win"by lying and deceit propaganda. So I dont call that winning- winning implies a fair game- Most in govt do not know they are deceiving working for the enemy "elite" aka . but those that do know, are their souls really at peace? learning that virus do not exist was personally liberating, I will never be giving big pharma or any doctor one penny for as long as I live. Of course this Truth comes with the double edged sword called pain of knowing because those we love most wont listen to us and the pain of being fooled. So we must be strong enough to handle watching the needless/deliberate imposed suffering by Big Pharma meds
You are not alone, if you have $5 per month, Dr Cowans Community you will find friends.
or Dr. Sam Baileys community too..., I put out mini flyers called LuckyDay from www.VirusTruth.NET everyday 20-30, its my FU to Big Pharma -its my therapy- I cannot surrender, and I sleep better at night bec doing nothing assures failure, vs 50/50 shot (pun intended) I get someone to get off the vaccine hamsterwheel. If not, I consider them warned and I feel better not sitting on the info- putting it out , planting seeds
Great post! I am still shocked by the amount of people that are going and getting "tested" for "covid" (or any other flu/cold like illness!). The human race survived for a long time without getting "tested" for colds. My mom and my grandmother had their own "PCR" tests! Hand on the forehead... yep, you've got a fever. Are you coughing? Yep. Do you feel achy and tired? Yep. Well... (drum roll please).... you've got a cold or the flu. Time to get some rest, drink some water and stay home from school/work. Somehow, this method of testing has gone by the wayside, even though it's 100 times more accurate than all of these fake fear tests. I will NOT be tested. (Not to mention, that if a person goes and gets an "official" "test" for a cold/flu they are put into a government database). Good grief people, wake the F up!
I had to weekly test for a job at the time.
One time I was sick and never got positive.
The other time, I wasn't sick, but got positive. That week, the others who had to test got positive too, even though they work in different buildings and different shifts.
That week, my girlfriend's sister tested positive, but she lived an hour away.
I guess that week they pumped up the amplification and got many false positives.
The crazy thing about PCR is that if many cycles of amplification can bring false positives, it means that every copy step introduces "artifacts".
So I don't see how this tool is accurate or useful at all, even when used for it's "intended purpose'!
How do you know there's any testing at all? May be an algorithm that random picks from the set?
Assume that the PCR was finding the virus. Now, the virus has morphed but it will still have some of its past signature. PCR should then find the virus even though it has evolved.
Now, assume the PCR is finding nothing. Then how does it decide that something is positive? It is randomly saying yes or no. If this is the case, why bother with anything else other than writing a program that spits out either yes or no.
It's looking for a match of a sequence of the so called "virus".
As the PCR test run with high cycles can have false matches, the results are garbage, whether the virus is real or not.
Genetics is not the exact science that they pretended it to be.
Using genetics to diagnose infections is a scam to get more customers 😂.
It's USEFUL because the SWAB has graphene on it, and it goes right up near your brain so you can't sneeze it out. Graphene is hideously Not Good, and combined with EMF's can cause a LOT of problems, including blood clots, according to Ricard Delgado, head guy at La Quinta Columna, the Spanish Laboratory that was first to look at what exactly was in those vials of Jab Juice that Pfizer put out... Graphene, according to LQC, will naturally detox from the body after about a month, and that's why they want you to have "boosters." Pretty gnarly shit.
And what if there IS NO "cold" or "flu"?
What if that is something other than what... a virus? No, you don't think a virus, do you?
What if these things turn out to be, at least sometimes, EMF's? The symptoms are the same... some of them. EMF exposure has MANY symptoms.
Now we can discuss THAT! :)
Mullis has been thoroughly outed as a fraud, 100 times over. Anyone still clinging onto him as some sort of hero or truth teller at this point is either incredibly gullible or gatekeeping.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fbpYott1Mdw_BuuiE6_rjO_7Xr5Z_PdoxtK3fNZI9Gc
Thanks for the link.
I usually go by my own sense on a topic, whether he was great or not, the whole PCR thing makes no sense.
It's the same with the double slit quantum experiments lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaUzq4YuErs&list=PLkdAkAC4ItcFyNFBywN0wiZ45pCnMr-Ay
https://www.youtube.com/@itsbs/playlists
Hey Rob, with all due respect, you really need to "read the room" and do some catching up on the truth about Kary Mullis. It's no longer a secret.
I was actually THERE in our old "AIDS" dissident movement. I MET Mullis- a FEW TIMES, actually, and most notably, I actually helped to PRODUCE the actual seminar where Mullis made some comments way back in 1997 in front of a red brick wall which continue to be MISINTERPRETED by well-meaning (and maybe NOT so "well-meaning") dissidents of the present day.
In addition to the eye-opening and informative link that "pooanon" graciously presented to you ( https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fbpYott1Mdw_BuuiE6_rjO_7Xr5Z_PdoxtK3fNZI9Gc ), PLEASE LOOK AT THESE LINKS:
1. https://longtimedissident.substack.com/p/the-mullis-mirage
2. https://controlstudies.substack.com/p/kary-mullis-dancing-naked-in-the
3. https://longtimedissident.substack.com/p/new-kary-mullis-was-not-killed-by
Learning how Mullis behaved in our old "AIDS" dissident movement IS important because we need to stay vigilant against such behavior in this current dissident movement!
Good post. It opened up much discussion.
"I wonder if he realized that his invention was broken from the beginning"
He's one of the fake heroes the blob makes all the time, it's made as a deception and he is the face of it, just like Musk, Gates, etc. Same game plan.
I am trying to understand the issue here, so pardon me if I am thick.
The premise of PCR is to amplify DNA materials. And you are wondering [a] if all material is amplified in the same ratio [b] the DNA is not getting split up and joining back to show up as something else (a la Saddam combining with his dog in Hot Shots Deux, the movie)? Are there other potential issues that you are thinking about not listed above?
Thanks.
My issue is that the copying, or amplification is assumed to be perfect. It's not, because it's based on a primer reaction. They're basically using a reaction to copy the same pool over and over because the original pool is too small to measure whether a sequence is inside it.
If you can't measure something before copying it, how are you sure if the copy is same as the original?
In the digital world numbers are absolute and copies are identical. However PCR has the same issue that analog copies have... When you run more and more cycles you'll find false positives. That means the copy of the copy etc ends up with random noise, aka it's not ever an exact copy...
Surely, they ran some controlled tests where they knew what the inputs were and then tested if the outputs matched the inputs in more or less the same fractions? They could have even run tests where they went the other way by first predicting on test samples and then checking if the inputs matched. The first will be to predict probabilities conditioned on inputs and the second will be to predict probabilities conditioned on outputs. If they both match, one can apply Bayes formula. And that would be the basis of PCR test if they really did all that.
True but the tell is where if they run more and more cycles they find everything. Kary Mullis joked that if you look deep enough you'll find everything in the Buddhist sense.
My issue with PCR is that if copies of copies start creating artifacts, it's an analog copy and not digital "bit perfect" as the geneticists act.
It's like copying a copy of a VCR tape, every time you copy a copy it gets more noise.
Meanwhile copying a mp4 video file is identical no matter how many times you copy it.
Your logic is a breath of fresh air especially when compared to omar jordon's take down of DNA along the lines of "because you can't see it it doesn't exist"
Sheesh, that would not satisfy me. That's why I still believed in DNA until recently, as we see how the measurement of it is based on an arbitrary choice of markers.
It's not only not falsifiable, it's also not provable!!! TY for pointing this out!!! Plain, simple logic - well done.
You have misinterpreted what Kary Mullis said. I can't find the video now, but it should still be widely available. If you listen to his own words he advises against using it as a test for anything. That's not what it's designed for.
I know, but I'm saying the PCR itself introduces logical issues.
The procedure itself doesn't make sense in the first place.
Let's say you wanted to examine a tiny thing.
So you make more copies to do experiments on some tiny thing.
Using chemicals to "amplify" it with copies induces artifacts.
Studying those copies, for genetics, whatever is a " good" use is also an issue. It assumes the copies are perfect.
It's all about the SWAB, yo.
That's what I said! lol