Tricky? How about downright fake, corrupt and useless. How can a rock test positive using PCR for covid or any of the other fake viruses? Perhaps the human genome is a fake-out also...which I happen to believe.
Possible. The "human genome" is certainly just a model of all the collected human sequences. If it truly represents the "code of life" for a human organism is unknown.
Kevin McKernan, who blocks me here on Substack and on X replied to my direct email in which I said:
"IMHO anyone who shared the now deleted paper by Lital Mordechay, Gideon Baum, Rinat Gabbay-Benziv, Hila Weinberger & Milana Frenkel Morgenstern has an obligation to delete and inform all US Senators who might have been conned."
Kevin replied:
"I would explicitly argue against this until you hear from the authors on why it was censored or deleted otherwise you’re no better than Elizabeth Bik cheering on the rampant censorship.
Mainly because Ben arguments you posted without question are incoherent.
1)The primers don’t match on the 3’ end and all hit different chromosomes making human PCR impossible (he’s never performed PCR so it’s clear he’s not aware of these primer design constraints).
2)they Sanger sequenced the amplicons confirming they were spike not human nullifying Bens hypothesis. They should make these reads public to address these concerns.
3)they used pre2020 negative controls which were negative. They should use more if available.
4)their positivity shows 100% correlation between blood and placenta. Contamination would be more random.
Yes… they need to dig into their unvaxxed positivity with more NTCs but that may be a second paper if they properly disclose this limitation.
The proper call is to wait for more data as opposed to your polarizing pre-judgement.
The sign of intelligence is to be able to contemplate multiple hypothesis in parallel without demanding a preliminary judgement."
I have not looked at X yet to see whether he has entered the debate with you Ben.
Thanks for updating. Nicholas Hulscher needs to correct the record.
Yep, the same is true for his claims about "human genome integration" which was first peddled by McKernan. https://x.com/USMortality/status/1967689120018473091
Another rabbit hole to go down lol.
Tricky? How about downright fake, corrupt and useless. How can a rock test positive using PCR for covid or any of the other fake viruses? Perhaps the human genome is a fake-out also...which I happen to believe.
Possible. The "human genome" is certainly just a model of all the collected human sequences. If it truly represents the "code of life" for a human organism is unknown.
Thank you, thank you… for what only you can do.
Kevin McKernan, who blocks me here on Substack and on X replied to my direct email in which I said:
"IMHO anyone who shared the now deleted paper by Lital Mordechay, Gideon Baum, Rinat Gabbay-Benziv, Hila Weinberger & Milana Frenkel Morgenstern has an obligation to delete and inform all US Senators who might have been conned."
Kevin replied:
"I would explicitly argue against this until you hear from the authors on why it was censored or deleted otherwise you’re no better than Elizabeth Bik cheering on the rampant censorship.
Mainly because Ben arguments you posted without question are incoherent.
1)The primers don’t match on the 3’ end and all hit different chromosomes making human PCR impossible (he’s never performed PCR so it’s clear he’s not aware of these primer design constraints).
2)they Sanger sequenced the amplicons confirming they were spike not human nullifying Bens hypothesis. They should make these reads public to address these concerns.
3)they used pre2020 negative controls which were negative. They should use more if available.
4)their positivity shows 100% correlation between blood and placenta. Contamination would be more random.
Yes… they need to dig into their unvaxxed positivity with more NTCs but that may be a second paper if they properly disclose this limitation.
The proper call is to wait for more data as opposed to your polarizing pre-judgement.
The sign of intelligence is to be able to contemplate multiple hypothesis in parallel without demanding a preliminary judgement."
I have not looked at X yet to see whether he has entered the debate with you Ben.