Recently, I’ve written a series of articles revealing that the existence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is unproven.
I’ve quoted key CDC and study documents that confess “the virus is unavailable.” Which is like an ice company saying they have no access to water.     
I’ve published quotes from Dr. Tom Cowan’s major article  exposing how CDC journal authors “assemble” the idea of a virus from cobbled sequences they ASSUME are parts of SARS-CoV-2. (Below, I reprint my article on Dr. Cowan’s shocking findings.)
Now, I want to make overall comments on the con, the game, the hustle.
The public, and most medical professionals, are awed by the whole concept of genetic sequencing. They accept the process as a holy of holies. If researchers in their lab claim they’ve “sequenced the virus,” the virus must exist. How else could its genetic structure have been discovered?
Of course, the virus doesn’t have to exist at all. We are talking about an illusion. Stage magic.
And if we could force him to explain his trick, the magician would say:
“Notice, I begin with a fragment of RNA I assume is part of a larger new virus. My assumption isn’t proven. I simply make the claim.”
“Then I lay out the genetic structure of that little piece of RNA, and I discover I need a great more genetic information to fill out the sequence of the whole virus.”
“That’s not really a discovery. I already knew I’d need much more. The question is: where am I going to get that added information?”
“The answer is: from data bases. These bases contain miles of sequences that have already been established—rightly or wrongly. Sequences of other viruses.”
“Which sequences do I choose? I make guesses. I make assumptions. Actually, I choose according to a story line that has already been laid down. In this case, a story about a member of the coronavirus family. That’s right. I always knew what I was going to look for. In fact, that initial piece of RNA I began with? I could have selected all sorts of other pieces of RNA, but I chose that one because it seemed to be from the coronavirus family.”
“Does this whole business sound like a Lego or tinker-toy operation? Well, it is. I never have a physical specimen of the virus. I never isolate the purported virus from all the material that surrounds it. I just assume or pretend the virus is in there.”
“Anyway, I now select all sorts of genetic sequences from the huge database. And I hook the sequences together, AS IF they were already connected and real and waiting for me to find them. They weren’t, but I pretend they were.”
“That pretense is the key. It’s like selling a sucker a map leading to a lost silver mine. There was never a map. The con artist cobbled it together from pieces of other old maps of a territory in the mountains of Colorado. The map looks real. It looks whole. But it was never whole.”
“THE GENETIC SEQUENCE OF THE VIRUS is that map. It’s made to look like a one long code that was there all along. But it wasn’t. It isn’t.”
“Every good magic trick works this way. The magician makes the audience believe he is performing one smooth operation. But he isn’t. He’s taking all sorts of detours. He’s reaching into his sleeve and pulling out a card. He’s palming that card so no one sees it. He’s slipping the card into the deck in his other hand. And all the while, he’s talking confidently and making other gestures to distract the audience.”
“The whole purpose of the trick is to inspire awe. In the lab, the same principle applies. The researchers SEEM to find one long genetic sequence of the whole virus. Astonishing.”
“But that’s not what happened. Not by a long shot.”
“And notice one other very important thing. In the lab, we are actually piecing and cobbling together the pattern—the code—of a virus. We don’t have to deal with actual genes. What we do is all on the level of IDEATIONAL construction. We’re hooking up DATA. So that’s another level of the trick. We’re not stringing together pieces of material. We’re stringing together pieces of data from genetic databases. This would be like standing on stage in front of an audience and doing a very clever card trick without having a deck of cards in the first place. Now THAT’S a trick for the ages.”
With all this I mind, read my previous article on Dr. Tom Cowan’s shocking discoveries:
Dr. Tom Cowan explores the COVID virus invented out of sheer nonsense
—Cowan analyzes yet another key document posted by the CDC, in their journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases: “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States”—
by Jon Rappoport
October 19, 2020
The hits keep coming. The CDC used an arbitrary computer “tinker-toy” process to invent a description of the virus. The virus that no one has proven exists. This is the basic conclusion of Dr. Tom Cowan.
Dr. Cowan: “[The CDC journal article] was published in June 2020 [original publication, March 2020]. The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research. A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.”
“First, in the section titled ‘Whole Genome Sequencing,’ we find that rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end, they found 37 base pairs from unpurified samples using PCR probes. This means they actually looked at 37 out of the approximately 30,000 of the base pairs that are claimed to be the genome of the intact virus. They then took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs.”
In other words, the sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was done by assumption and arbitrary inference. If this is science, a penguin is a spaceship.
Cowan: “To me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn’s hair, hooves and horn.”
“The researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by ‘consensus,’ sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary ‘unicorn,’ so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn.”
As I’ve been stating , the “discovery” of the “new virus” was actually the foisting of a PRE-DETERMINED STORY ABOUT A VIRUS. Nothing real or believable about it.
But once the official pattern is laid down, others follow it dutifully.
Dr. Cowan uncovers more insanity in the CDC journal article. Using the ASSUMED new virus, in an UN-ISOLATED STATE, the researchers try to prove it is harmful by injecting it on to several different types of cells in the lab:
Cowan: “The real blockbuster finding in this study comes later, a finding so shocking that I had to read it many times before I could believe what I was reading. Let me quote the passage intact:”
“’Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells [monkey cells]. … Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero [monkey] cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells [human cells] were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection’.”
“What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible ‘hosts’ or models on which they can test…”
“The third method virologists use to prove infection and pathogenicity — the method they most rely on — is inoculation of solutions they say contain the virus onto a variety of tissue cultures. As I have pointed out many times, such inoculation has never been shown to kill (lyse) the tissue, unless the tissue is first starved and poisoned.”
“The shocking thing about the above [CDC journal] quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this ‘new coronavirus’ is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix.”
“My friends, read this again and again. These virologists, published by the CDC, performed a clear proof, on their terms, showing that the SARS-CoV- 2 virus is harmless to human beings. That is the only possible conclusion, but, unfortunately, this result is not even mentioned in their conclusion. They simply say they can provide virus stocks cultured only on monkey Vero cells, thanks for coming.”
So first…use a process of genetic sequencing that involves concocting, out of an arbitrary computer program…
The existence and structure of the “new virus”…
And then, taking a soup that the researchers claim contains the virus, in an un-isolated state, inject the soup into several types of cells in the lab…
And discover the prime target—human cells—are not infected by the imaginary virus.
And after this good day’s work, walk away and pretend nothing odd or self-incriminating happened.
And oh yes, lock down the planet based on this “science.”
Naturally, we MUST take a toxic vaccine that prevents non-infection by the non-virus.