Deus Ex Machina and the Invention of “SARS-CoV-2”

Feb6 2022

virus deus ex machina

A German mathematician working with Dr Stefan Lanka has just published a report titled “Structural analysis of sequence data in virology – An elementary approach using SARS-CoV-2 as an example.” It provides even more evidence that the virologists are caught up in a world of computer simulations – simulations that are unreliable even on their own terms, not to mention being disconnected from reality.  The analysis is an important contribution exposing another element of the anti-science being used to sustain this fake pandemic.  Further, it is a technical dismantling of how all “viruses” are being invented and then “found,” in an ongoing game of deception.

Video:

https://odysee.com/$/embed/covid19-fraud-and-war-on-humanity-part-one/e0200243309a497bbcdbdbd0b405432f9e1c2edd?r=BxfCAAwkVcTaGj2HSs4JhKaWMxmrTVUW

The paper is very technical and requires some understanding of how the virologists create a “genome,” starting with a crude sample from an alleged infected “COVID-19” patient.  To make it easier, I’ve produced a summary of the main findings as outlined below: 

  • None of the genetic sequences used in producing the “SARS-CoV-2” genomes were shown to come from inside any viruses.  It is unclear where the genetic fragments originated from.
  • The original de novo “SARS-CoV-2” computer-constructed sequence published by Fan Wu, et al could not be reproduced by the methodology described in their paper, raising questions about how they produced it and announced the new “virus” to the world.
  • The PCR protocols are calibrated to sequences of unconfirmed origin that are clearly found in many humans and apparently other things as well.  The PCR process was not shown to detect a “virus,” let alone diagnose an invented illness called “COVID-19”.
  • The virologists are fooling themselves by running amplifications at 35 to 45 cycles, as it can result in “detecting” sequences that are not even present in the sample.  In effect, the methodology can result in “detecting” whatever sequences they are hoping to find.
  • Fan Wu, et al could have found better matches for “HIV” and “Hepatitis D virus” than “a new coronavirus” in their 41-year-old man from Wuhan, who presented with pneumonia as one of the first claimed “COVID-19” cases.  If they want to find a “virus”, it all depends on what they ask the computer to look for.

Of course, it makes much more sense when you get to the root of the problem: “SARS-CoV-2” is nothing more than a computer simulation and there was never a virus to start with – the entire thing is a global fraud.  Virology seems to be unaware that it is sinking further into an epistemological crisis and no more so than in the area of genomics, as outlined in this article by Mike Stone.   In Stone’s article, I noticed in the comments section that Dr Valendar Turner of The Perth Group pointed out that the late Sir John Maddox, former editor of Nature, had issued a pertinent warning in 1988.  It seems that those who become immersed in the world of indirect molecular detection techniques risk no longer seeing the wood for the trees as he presciently stated:

“Is there a danger, in molecular biology, that the accumulation of data will get so far ahead of its assimilation into a conceptual framework that the data will eventually prove an encumbrance? Part of the trouble is that excitement of the chase leaves little time for reflection. And there are grants for producing data, but hardly any for standing back in contemplation”. 

Maddox, J. Nature 335, 11 (1998)

We will endeavour to keep exposing these anti-scientific methodologies and encourage others to ask themselves if the multi-billion dollar virology industry and the associated bogus “treatments” coming from the behemoth pharmaceutical complex are actually helping anyone with their health.  For those of us that can see there is no sound basis to any of it, there is no way we would heed any advice from the doctors and scientists who promote these sick models.  And perhaps more importantly, we know not to take any of the fraudulent and increasingly perverse pharmaceuticals that are products of this pseudoscience, and used as vehicles to deliver nefarious and undeclared constituents.  Once again, you can avoid all of these problems by pointing out:

Where is the virus*?

*A tiny particle that is an obligate intracellular parasite (i.e. replication competent and transmissible) containing a genome surrounded by a protective, virus-coded protein coat.

Categories: Covid-19, Viral ExistenceBy Dr. Mark Bailey

One thought on “Deus Ex Machina and the Invention of “SARS-CoV-2”

  1. It has taken many of us some time to put all the pieces together, but now it is as clear as daylight that the ‘pandemic’ is the medical version of the ‘Emperor’s New Clothes’. The WEF charlatans have promoted a nanometer of nothing as a deadly virus, and all the medical ‘experts’ (not wishing to be thought of as ignorant fools) have eagerly supported the deception. The Chinese kicked off Act 1 of the deception, and all the others fell in line. The problem is that, although there have been lots of little boys saying the Emperor is naked, or there is no covid, the ‘experts’ and much of the population is deaf and blind – possibly as a result of taking the ‘vaccine’. Just as with Father Christmas, most people believe in him (or in this case, covid-19), even though he (it) doesn’t exist. There’s none so blind as those who will not see!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: