You’d never guess I was once a CPA, as my storage system is chaos. But then, maybe I just wasn’t a very good CPA. I have a stack of papers on the bottom shelf of my bookcase, crawling with 3M flags, and in no order. I come across something and think “Hmm, I want to hang on to that,” and then forget about it. Yesterday I was asked for information on Covid, and before deciding not to provide anything to someone who can look and discover for his or herself, I went through the stack. In so doing I came across a list of 57 points of information concerning poliomyelitis. In looking for this list on the Internet, I found that it was compiled by Forest Maready, and that it does not exist in the form I have it, but rather now exists as 36 points, the last 21 absent, on a Twitter feed. I have tried but cannot find a way to move the last 21 points from paper to screen in readable form. Maybe it does not matter.
Maready is a prolific author, his first and maybe most important book called The Moth in the Iron Lung. That title will be self-explanatory when I am done, and perhaps even obvious to many readers. But first, I want to present a graph:
I dedicate this exploratory essay to my friends and family who received a COVID injection (without proper informed consent); and to all the individuals way back in the cheap seats, who may not be able to hear what I am saying, due to the drowned-out noise of Gain-of-Function (GOF) research, lab leaks, and e-mail leaks.
SPOILER ALERT: When I refer to a “spike protein” herein, it is NOT because I support the notion that a protein arose from a virus, nor do I think it “sheds” or operates in the way that has been postulated by individuals referenced below (all of whom maintain that there is a SARS-CoV-2 virus).
There has been much recent drama (and rightly so) centered around the spike protein of the purported SARS-CoV-2 virus, and more specifically, what is being described as the expression of the synthetic spike protein as a result of COVID injections.
It seems that Dr. Byram Bridle, Dr. Joseph Mercola (see here and here), Judy Mikovits, Stephanie Seneff, Dr. Russell Blaylock, and Dr. Sherri Tenpenny all agree that the spike protein — at the very least, the one that is being produced for/by the injections — is a toxin (see Endnote 1). The general consensus among them is that it is a bioweapon. Indeed, Tenpenny emphasized (interview linked above) that the spike protein is the bioweapon (not “the virus”), based on a study of a “harmless pseudovirus” that was conjugated with spike proteins, yet caused pulmonary arterial damage.
I am content knowing we can all move forward in agreeing this may be a lab-created bioweapon; however, why do so many still have tunnel vision, remaining fixated on GOF research? Could there be other labs doing related research — perhaps protein R&D, or even more precisely, “spike protein” R&D (sans virus)? And how do synchrotrons factor in to all of this? As you read further, I offer a plot twist in this regard, so I hope you can stay tuned as I set up the prelude . . .
Following are two conversations I heard today that I feel are vital, and among the most enlightening and enriching I have absorbed since the beginning of the pandemic narrative. Hint: the one common denominator is Dr. Tom Cowan.
If (like me) you have listened to nearly all of Tom’s interviews during the past year, in reference to viruses and vaccines, there are still new intellectually stimulating, health-supporting, heart-stirring, and life-affirming nuggets to glean from these two April 2021 chats.
“We’ll have nanobots that . . . connect our neocortex to a synthetic neocortex in the cloud . . . Our thinking will be a . . . biological and non-biological hybrid.”
~ Ray Kurzweil, TED 2014
Part 6 of the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots”
Influenza and Zika and COVID, oh my!
Not to worry . . . the pandemic panopticon-obsessed problem-reaction solutionaries are here to save us! So they say . . .
In November 2020, I had an “aha” moment, when reading Hacking Matter: Levitating Chairs, Quantum Mirages, and the Infinite Weirdness of Programmable Atoms. The author, Wil McCarthy, who holds a patent in the sector of quantum dot technology, asserted, “At the nanoscale, where we find very tiny, very simple objects . . . the behavior of particles is governed by quantum mechanics . . . your ‘gut feel’ about how a particle should behave is virtually useless for predicting what it will actually do. This is because on the nanoscale, what we call ‘particles’ are really ‘probability waves’ . . . Probability waves can do ‘impossible’ things like leaping across an impenetrable barrier, or existing in many places at the same time, or apparently predicting the future, or being influenced by distant events much faster than the speed of light should allow.” McCarthy continued, “Objects much smaller than a micron in size start to behave in some very non-Newtonian ways . . .”
Essentially, at the nanoscale, quantum effects begin to dominate the behavior of matter. Let’s just say it gets more spooky.
I have a sense that when top scientists discovered the bio-nano realm with their atomic force microscopes, they saw a land of opportunity for profit (i.e., in the field of bio-nanomedicine), but I also think they saw a land of plenty — intriguing depths of additional space with which to harness control. The nano space, similar to secret societies, has been highly occulted, as unsuspecting human beings are not equipped with atomic force microscopes with which to peer into our bodies, and the bodies of neighboring plants and animals. There is an entire world inside all of us much smaller than the micro level. When heading way down to the bottom of life’s existence, life has a meaning and function that literallydisobeys the laws of gravity.
Part 3 of the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots”
In this installment, I address a sub-topic related to viruses and vaccines. For the purpose of this analysis, I will not debate whether a virus has been properly purified and isolated (see this compilation of FOIs and responses on SARS-CoV-2 isolation, last updated on February 7, 2021), or whether a virus is a “virus,” or an exosome, or some other phage-like entity. If you want to explore this, see this January 2021 discussion with Dr. Thomas Cowan and Dr. Andrew Kaufman, which was facilitated by Derrick Broze, of The Conscious Resistance. Additionally, to consider an alternative perspective that questions traditional viral contagion, see The Contagion Myth, by Dr. Thomas Cowan and Sally Fallon Morell. For an enhanced understanding of mRNA vaccine methodology, listen to Tom Cowan’s recent explanation (and for a juxtaposed mainstream position, see Endnote 1). Dr. Cowan reminds viewers that Moderna did not require a physical sample isolate of a virus to manufacture their vaccine, as directly claimed by its developers.
When reading my exploratory essay, below are questions readers may want to reflect upon:
Can a self-spreading vaccine be mistaken as a self-spreading infectious virus (a curious case of stolen identity)?
Why would a self-spreading vaccine be used to mimic a virus?
What could questions #1 and #2 have to do with digitalization and virtualization?
If there was a situation in which non-consensual vaccination were to be intentionally utilized among the human population (as it has in animal populations), should there be an opportunity beforehand for public discourse to discuss the ethical issues?
Before delving into my presentation, it may help to consider that some reported epidemics, including the 1918 Influenza epidemic, may have had an iatrogenic cause (unconfirmed by mainstream allopathic scientists), as opposed to a true, wild-type source of contagion.
Along the lines of this iatrogenic hypothetical premise, I am proposing an alternative framework of contagion within the context of a purported pandemic— which may initially appear to be paradoxical. Accordingly, can a transmissible physical agent (a biomarker, such as an antigen) be spread throughout the global population via a recombinant vaccine-based vector (such as an influenza vaccine), along with a virtual agent (being called a virus) that mirrors the physical biomarker (which has been “tagged” to enable traceability) to reflect its movement through said population? Please note that I have not referred to this biomarker as a pathogen, nor infectious (in ways previously taught in school/medical school). Also, when I consider that a vaccine may be transmissible (AKA “contagious”), I am NOT referring to the “shedding of a virus,” NOR am I referring to “gain-of-function” research (see Endnote 2). Contrary to the concept of gain-of-function studies, there are studies (see here, here, and here) indicating that self-spreading vaccines may involve the application of synthetic biology and genetic engineering (including recombination) methods to enable the transmissible vaccines to be LESS virulent, with “subdued” effects in its serial transfer among a population. Lastly, within my hypothetical framework, I am NOT implying that previously identified influenza cases would be re-categorized as a novel infectious disease, although it does not rule out that possibility. In fact, my theory could potentially offer an alternative explanation to the seeming disappearance of a reportedly common infectious disease, such as the flu.
So what then could I be talking about? Let’s drill down a bit.
BarbM recently linked us in a comment to a site that has volumes of work by the German virologist Stefan Lanka. It can be found here. Someone, and I am guessing it is the Administrator of the site, Steven Avery, has translated the works into English, a yeoman’s effort. The translation is not rough, but precise, meaning that it was done by someone with a very good knowledge of very complex subject matter.