Big flaw in his idea - won't they lose control of the virus in the vaccine?

[78ast78dgyad]

They can't release a real virus.

 

But there is a real virus in the vaccine.

 

 

[Daithi]

I would be interested to see some decent science that proves the existence of any real virus fullstop.

[Itsa]

8 hours ago, 78ast78dgyad said:

They can't release a real virus.

 

But there is a real virus in the vaccine.

 

 

Who's idea? David Ickes?

He's likening the vaccines to more like a computer virus disrupting the natural bodies operating system.

I don't think he's been saying anything about shedding or making claims along those lines but do correct me if that's wrong.

 

Can you not give a more detailed description of what you are trying to say here rather than two short sentences?

 

[78ast78dgyad]

9 hours ago, Itsa said:

Who's idea? David Ickes?

He's likening the vaccines to more like a computer virus disrupting the natural bodies operating system.

I don't think he's been saying anything about shedding or making claims along those lines but do correct me if that's wrong.

 

Can you not give a more detailed description of what you are trying to say here rather than two short sentences?

 

 

 

He has said they would not release a real virus because you lose control of it.

He then said it would be too dangerous and unpredictable to leak a real virus from a lab.

 

 

Edited July 17, 2021 by 78ast78dgyad

[78ast78dgyad]

9 hours ago, Daithi said:

I would be interested to see some decent science that proves the existence of any real virus fullstop.

 

He has said the virus isn't real.

 

He then says the real virus is in the vaccine.

 

 

[TetraG]

7 hours ago, 78ast78dgyad said:

He then says the real virus is in the vaccine.

 

Either way, isn't the point that both are anti human by their nature?... As bad as a cancer even??  (not that I like comparing things with cancer, ick), a thing which noone would welcome yet they welcome a still somewhat unknown slew of vaccines?.. I shudder to think?..  

(well, in other threads I think a virus in the vaccine has been dismissed, but I am ready to stand corrected, which is half of the point of my post) 

 

Maybe David just likened the vaccines to "a virus", but whereas primarily I think a "computer generated virus" as it were he definitely said, and all ends in with a not nice ending...  but its still useful to understand Davids words and phrases.

 

I think "computer generated" said to a normal person just makes their eyes roll as they take it as if it only is concerning computers like as if to suggest we are the stupid ones, haha, but even tho I saw the video with that 2 word phrase in, I too need more understanding of what David means by "computer generated" or computer imagined/designed the theory of a pretend virus using software program,  so in that sense it makes sense...but could be helpful if those that know more tell us more please..  

 

Well one thing that does concern computers are data & predictive figure sets (based on whim and whats convenient for the government and World Health Organization,  World Hack Organization more like).   

 

Edited July 17, 2021 by TetraG

[TetraG]

17 hours ago, Itsa said:

 

Can you not give a more detailed description of what you are trying to say here rather than two short sentences?

 

Hey, its all my head can take sometimes!!   Keeping simple worked on me this time. 

[Daithi]

The definitions are important. I think we often use "virus" in a broader sense than the strict medical definition of a submicroscopic agent that passes from body to body. The size of the pathogen is the key difference. I believe that with regard to the vaccines, we are talking about the shedding of the spike proteins which are agents that have been created by the cell factories being passed between us. These proteins are not a virus, they are a toxin. I think that currently David Icke says that the vaccines cause disease, but it wouldn't surprise me if he has previously referenced "virus". I think alot of people have only deep dived these terms since March 2020!

 

So to recap, post March 2020:

 

There is no empirical science that I can find to prove that RNA viruses per the strict definition exist.

 

There is science available that discredits the Pasteur/Carnegie/Rockefeller "germ theory" and RNA viruses for those who choose to reconsider their indoctrinated understanding of illness transmission.

 

 

[Daithi]

On 7/18/2021 at 12:20 AM, TetraG said:

I think "computer generated" said to a normal person just makes their eyes roll as they take it as if it only is concerning computers like as if to suggest we are the stupid ones, haha, but even tho I saw the video with that 2 word phrase in, I too need more understanding of what David means by "computer generated" or computer imagined/designed the theory of a pretend virus using software program,  so in that sense it makes sense...but could be helpful if those that know more tell us more please..  

 

My recollection is when David Icke described the process of genome sequencing to identify the SARS-CoV2 pathogen. Various health authorities across the globe took saliva samples from people with flu/pneumonia symptoms in late 2019/ early 2020.

 

My memory is a little hazy but it's something like the saliva samples provide fragments of RNA and only 30 out of the 3000 RNA fragments needed to sequence a full genome were identified from the samples. The computer software "models" the full 3000 needed for a genome sequence based on the 30 fragments passed into the sequencing program.

 

The process was likened to having the toenail of an animal and then drawing the complete animal from that.

 

When the individual health authorities compared their results, none of their modelled genome sequences matched, so they took a vote on the individual computer generated sequences to decide which was the global definition of SARS-CoV2.

 

This is from memory so there might be detail inaccuracies but I think this is pretty much what David Icke is driving at.

[Ethel]

On 7/17/2021 at 4:43 PM, 78ast78dgyad said:

 

He has said the virus isn't real.

 

He then says the real virus is in the vaccine.

 

 

 

I think that's a metaphor.

[78ast78dgyad]

2 hours ago, Ethel said:

 

I think that's a metaphor.

 

He meant that they cannot release a real virus because they could accidentally kill millions of people and accidentally destroy society.

 

 

He then says the plan is to destroy society and rebuild it.

 

 

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by 78ast78dgyad

[peter]

On 7/17/2021 at 7:16 AM, 78ast78dgyad said:

They can't release a real virus.

 

But there is a real virus in the vaccine.

 

 

You have just contradicted  yourself

If there is a real virus in the vaccine,by definition due to inoculation it has been released.

However if the vaccine is actually gene therapy( and according to company web sites a few years ago that is exactly what this so called vaccine was labeled as) and not a virus as such, you now have your answer as to the implication of David Ickes statements.

 

(He then says the plan is to destroy society and rebuild it.)

 

Death by stealth instead of something as in your face like Ebola, the outcome is still the same ,however it takes a little longer but the real causes can be hidden from main stream consciences or at the very least be diluted to such an extent it will take years for shit to hit the fan so to speak, asbestos and tobacco ,case in point.

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by peter