Boobie Bomb
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 13 de Abr, 2020
This is the best timeline I have ever seen in this day and age. Let's keep going and see what happens next?
WHO, World Bank, Gates foundation Hacked
- Iniciador del tema NotaLolyer
- Fecha de inicio
-
🚨 DDoS attack. Tor is stable: https://kiwifarmsaaf4t2h7gc3dfc5ojhmqruw2nit3uejrpiagrxeuxiyxcyd.onion/.
🔎 Please read my article, How to Dox Anyone: A Liz Fong-Jones Story. (Xitter), (Substack). -
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Registrado
- 31 de Ago, 2017
Since I'm known for my hilariously bad takes, and everybody seems to be too cool to wear their tinfoil asshats, I'll go ahead and jump on these grenades:
Also, since when is a patent proof that something works or doesn't work? And how much do you think I can sell my "ocean-front property in Nevada" patent for?
If I'm reading this right: "it may or may not be artificial," and "it's probably not ACTUALLY a treatment, or at least not a viable one."
Are we reading the same guy here? @pull over dat ass too fat, care to clarify?
I'm not sure that link is helpful; it merely describes how to pack fish in dry ice. How do we know it would take "enough for frozen foods to get from one end of the world to another"?
Also, since when is a patent proof that something works or doesn't work? And how much do you think I can sell my "ocean-front property in Nevada" patent for?
I'm so not reading 1400+ pages right now. Happily KF has a handy-dandy search feature. So let's plug in @pull over dat ass too fat, and also "HIV." Two results. Neat!
If I'm reading this right: "it may or may not be artificial," and "it's probably not ACTUALLY a treatment, or at least not a viable one."
Are we reading the same guy here? @pull over dat ass too fat, care to clarify?
- Registrado
- 9 de Oct, 2019
Good thing I listened to my own advice and bookmarked this shit.
There you fucking go. Full analysis.
EDIT: also, tip for searching. Use words that don't have synonims and aren't used often. In this case it popus up when searching for his user and BLAST
- Registrado
- 13 de Jun, 2019
Leave my boy @pull over dat ass too fat alone. He did nothing wrong.
It is airborne AIDS if we call it airborne AIDS. If the media can rename the WuFlu, so can we.
It is airborne AIDS if we call it airborne AIDS. If the media can rename the WuFlu, so can we.
- Registrado
- 31 de Ago, 2017
Thanks!
So, skimming a bit, but your argument seems to be: "if THIS crackpot theory is wrong, then all SIMILAR theories must be wrong!" It seems like Pull was debunking a SPECIFIC combination theory (and also posits elsewhere that it COULD be artificial, but just as likely mutated naturally.)
You sure you're not putting words in his mouth? It IS called SARS-Covid-2, so it's not a stretch to assume it's related to other SARS strains. And there's nothing about HIV in the original article, nor Pull's debunking of it.
So... what's your point?
- Registrado
- 20 de Feb, 2017
Two people were talking about dry ice blasting, my original thought it couldn't be done due to sample size even if dry ice blasting wont kill 100% of the virus, until I found a Chinese patent to deactivate the virus with CO2.
i used that so people would get a good idea how much dry ice would be needed to travel Frozen foods need a lot of dry ice for traveling. Even in the United States you'll get semi's full of dry ice to ship frozen goods. That's about the amount you would need for peoples theory about dropping off dry ice at a fish market to spread disease.
- Registrado
- 31 de Ago, 2017
And we're trusting Chinese patents now?
Also, that hardly invalidates CO2 as a delivery mechanism. Not that I believe that story anyways, but if we're going to bust these theories, let's do it correctly.
- Registrado
- 9 de Oct, 2019
The problem is that as I explained ad nauseaum. The Indian paper cited there is the ONLY evidence all these fucking idiots ever use. The vaccine crackpot was already answered in that same page, and that's what he cited. The french nobel crackpot only cited the indian paper and his undisclosed "research" he lets no one see, the bioweapon crackpots only quote the indian paper an online rumor mills.
This aren't different crackpots. It's just the same amorphous blob of regurgitated bloggosphere self-fellatio. I've seen this phenomenom before time and time again. And like Potholer54 shows on his videos, once you get to the source, it's just a broken telephone starting from shit that wasn't peer reviewed.
Also, I'm not puting words in his mouth. I'm just pointing at his research when aplicable. I don't claim to talk for the kiwis. I'm not the Lorax for Autism.
- Registrado
- 31 de Ago, 2017
All these fucking idiots... from the email leaks?
WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO MY WINDMILL, YOU SADIST!?
Anyways, since you've invoked him, I'm perfectly happy to wait for @pull over dat ass too fat to come by and pat you on the head and tell you what a good boy you've been.
You have been a good boy. Haven't you?
EDIT: Also, I'd be remiss if I didn't point out:
Did he tho? Are you sure? HIV?
Friendly reminder: It's perfectly fine to mis-remember or be mistaken. I do it all the time.
Última edición:
MarvinTheParanoidAndroid
This will all end in tears, I just know it.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 24 de Feb, 2015
Do you happen to have a direct link to the post? I'd like to read the whole thing and fully get the goods.
- Registrado
- 9 de Oct, 2019
Very funny. And the email idiots so far are quoting air, forum posts with no backing, and emails with boomer paswords. But fuck it, you're right, I misremembered which idiot he was BLASTing there, sorry for that one, hell I didn't even remember a non-HIV idiot, either way. I'm fairly sure we did have the HIV shit redebunked here. But I'll BAST it again here myself. Or more concretely I'll blast insert 4. If you want I'll go after the other three later, right now I have to exercize.
So here's the original paper: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1.full
if you check:
inserts are the parts in black. So paper claims insert 4 is analogous to HIV. That is: "CAGACTAATT CTCCTCGGCG GGCA", alright, first off let's check where it is. If you go to the sequence because their figures are shit:
that's 23592 to 23625, BLAST THAT SHIT, also remember to tell BLAST to ignore SARS-COV2 else it'll just tell you SARS COV2 has 100% analogy. Yes that's even if you use BLAST straight from the ncbi page, it doesn't remember where it comes from like that. Just put those numbers in the range sarscov2 in the specimen and tell it to blast:
Well that's awkward, no relevant sequences at all. Go back and tell it to blastn so it'll check for more shit.
WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT. 13 (edit: ORGANISMS (God I'm dumb))AND NONE OF THEM ARE HIV. The indians fucked up. Because they're streetshitters. And that's why the non-peer-reviewed paper got assblasted to hell and back as soon as it got peer reviewed. Voila! Every idiot quoting this shit, nobel price or not, can get fucked.
If you want later today I'll blast the other 3. But suffice it to say, it's the same fucking result. THIS SHIT'S BUNK.
Última edición:
saintdrug
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 22 de Abr, 2020
- Registrado
- 31 de Ago, 2017
Thanks, I'm a funny guy!Very funny. And the email idiots so far are quoting air, forum posts with no backing, and emails with boomer paswords. But fuck it, you're right, I misremembered which idiot he was BLASTing there, sorry for that one, hell I didn't even remember a non-HIV idiot, either way. I'm fairly sure we did have the HIV shit redebunked here. But I'll BAST it again here myself. Or more concretely I'll blast insert 4. If you want I'll go after the other three later, right now I have to exercize.
So here's the original paper: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1.full
if you check:
inserts are the parts in black. So paper claims insert 4 is analogous to HIV. That is: "CAGACTAATT CTCCTCGGCG GGCA", alright, first off let's check where it is. If you go to the sequence because their figures are shit:
Ver archivo adjunto 1248223
that's 23592 to 23625, BLAST THAT SHIT, also remember to tell BLAST to ignore SARS-COV2 else it'll just tell you SARS COV2 has 100% analogy. Yes that's even if you use BLAST straight from the ncbi page, it doesn't remember where it comes from like that. Just put those numbers in the range sarscov2 in the specimen and tell it to blast:
Ver archivo adjunto 1248222
Well that's awkward, no relevant sequences at all. Go back and tell it to blastn so it'll check for more shit.
Ver archivo adjunto 1248226
WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT. 13 (edit: ORGANISMS (God I'm dumb))AND NONE OF THEM ARE HIV. The indians fucked up. Because they're streetshitters. And that's why the non-peer-reviewed paper got assblasted to hell and back as soon as it got peer reviewed. Voila! Every idiot quoting this shit, nobel price or not, can get fucked.
If you want later today I'll blast the other 3. But suffice it to say, it's the same fucking result. THIS SHIT'S BUNK.
This is a little more on-the-nose and easier to follow. I'm not sure why we're just snipping bits and pieces to compare, when it could be any one of them, but at some point I just have to throw my hands up and admit the awful truth: I just don't know very much at all about gene-splicing. Shocker, I know.
Again though, I do wonder what that paper has to do with the email leaks. (Which, as you rightly point out, aren't confirmed and may never be able to be.) As best I can parse it: this guy is saying he found 4 similarities to the HIV, and you're saying "no he didn't." Which is fair enough. I assume you (or someone else) looked at the other 3, with similar results?
So let's assume the paper you're citing is entirely bunk. Does this rule out HIV splicing entirely?
I know I'm asking a lot here. But that's because there's not a whole lot to go on, right now. I guess it helps that we've mapped the HIV genome, but that still sounds like a needle in a haystack for our human brains (if there's even a needle.)
On the up-side, people with advanced degrees are stuck at home with little to do. Sure would be nice to close the book on this.
- Registrado
- 11 de Jun, 2019
Damn, I should have said The normie fags used boomer passwords and had them quote that instead.
FagOps Honey Pots
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 9 de Oct, 2019
Here's the thing. All the indians did is run HIV and Covid 2 in search of similar sequences. They found 4 inserts (which means they aren't even coding proteins. Just random bits of code) that they considered similar enough.
They claimed 3 were from the same group and the 4th was from a different one. That's why I did the 4th first as for the other 3 I'd rather do all 3 then also use multisegment to look. But it's 1:02 over here so I'll do it tomorrow if anything. But really point is. This is exactly what the scientific community did to all 4 during peer review. And all 4 gave the same result.
Which is that they might be over 50% similar to HIV, but they're also a lot more similar to a buncha randomass shite. 'Cause he didn't bother checking if the sequence just so happens to be very common. So it's not HIV. It's just a small and not that statistically improvable sequence.
This doesn't debunk the HIV claim. Just those 4 segments. Issue is I have yet to see a single fucking article that uses the HIV claim and DOESN'T link back to that fucking paper. And we now have the whole damned genome. So I'm gonna say, what DOES debunk the HIV claim is the fact that THIS is the best they got. If this is the most similar they could find on 100% of the genome. Then it's not nearly enough.
I like to call this the "argumentum ad fellatio" fallacy, that is when journos or bloggers mass produce articles linking to each other with slightly variable versions of a claim all originating from a single, flawed or misquoted, point of data. In other words. When the circlejerk becomes the argument.
It doesn't have anything to do with the letters I was just mentioning it because the HIV argument got brought up again in the thread and I was answering to that, not the letters. Honestly so far the letters have just been disappointing because there's just nothing. I mean. I got a chuckle out of the passwords. But that's it.
- Registrado
- 18 de Jun, 2019
This is some crazy shit, man.
Crazy fucking fucking times we live in, man.
Crazy fucking fucking times we live in, man.
- Registrado
- 21 de Abr, 2020
Some people on twitter are saying and blaming 9chan for the hack and first putting it out.
The list of IDs and passwords appeared on a message board 4chan and later on another text storage in Pastebin. They were forwarded to groups on Telegram.
The report by SITE based in Maryland, US, says: The largest group of leaked email addresses was from the NIH, with 9,938 IDs leaked. The World Bank had 5,120 IDs leaked and WHO had 2,732 IDs leaked.
The list of IDs and passwords appeared on a message board 4chan and later on another text storage in Pastebin. They were forwarded to groups on Telegram.
The report by SITE based in Maryland, US, says: The largest group of leaked email addresses was from the NIH, with 9,938 IDs leaked. The World Bank had 5,120 IDs leaked and WHO had 2,732 IDs leaked.
Same thing when you put in your pin, when you use your credit card or debt card. Those machines [store them] I tell people all the time to never put in your pin when you purchase ANYTHING and use ALWAYS as a Credit card and push enter (green button) and do not ever use your pin unless you are at your bank and only your bank.
Última edición por un moderador:
I actually would wait for your blasting of the other 3. Then you will realize that they don't have streps. In fact HIV is the only one in common for all 4 segments. If I got some time I can guestimate a p value for that. Oh, people like to point out that it's not 4 segments but two if you compare to RaTG13. There are people in the field saying that Dr. Shi admitted herself that there is no actual virus left in her lab when asked for it; all she got is sequence. My friend working at HMS actually has a non-nefarious explanation for the insertions: your average virus lab uses so much adeno- vectors that the air and benches are all filled with their dead segments. Most of the time people don't use actual virus for experiments but simply the full length RNA/DNA wrapped in their envelop. Those constructs eat a lot of shit from the environment that's why you can always find adeno segments in them.
- Registrado
- 25 de Abr, 2019
Blast the other 3, fuck it, post that shit. Do all the fucking Science.
- Registrado
- 18 de Mayo, 2019
I like how 9chan has only existed for a couple of days but it's already "another imageboard popular with extremists."