reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0: It is based on the sworn statement of the late professor Doctor Francis Boyle, who has determined and concluded. Professor Boyle is the greatest authority in the field of bioweapons legislation. He is the author of it. So he knows what is legally meant by it. He knew. Like no other that the COVID-19 mRNA injection is a bioweapon. He has also made that loud and clear to the world known. After which despite being in good health, he passed away shortly after he had declared himself willing to give testimony under oath about this in court. The core of Professor Boyle's argument is that the COVID-19 mRNA injections contain derivatives of illegal military gene function research. As a result, the COVID-19 injections qualify by definition as a military biological weapon system, a bioweapon in other words. This bioweapon consists of two integrated components. The pathogenic load and the delivery mechanism. It is beyond doubt that the pathogenic load is the product of illegal gene or function research. Boyle refers to an article in the scientific journal Nature Medicine, of which I have included the link in this plea note. If you open that link, you will immediately read the warning that true scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus. You will also immediately know that what is called the new normal, true scientists, are not scientists but faith fanatics. These are the scientists behind whom the respondents hide. The article in Nature Medicine that Boyle reports on was published in 2015. And the title reads translated, a cluster of circulating coronaviruses in bats similar to SARS shows potential for human infection. I present to you. What the summary of this research included in the article reveals. It states based on these findings, we have synthetically created an infectious fully SHC zero fourteen recombinant virus developed and demonstrated robust viral replication. Both in vitro and in vivo. So it states, we researchers have created a SARS like coronavirus with a spike protein optimized for human infection. I cannot provide a better example of illegal gain of function research. And who wrote that article from 2015? Among others, researchers affiliated with UNC Chapel Hill and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Wuhan. Yes, Wuhan. You know, where according to the official narrative, people suddenly dropped dead on the street when COVID-19 broke out because there was a bat mutated. The spike protein, the pathogenic payload of the bioweapon is the result of this research. So it's not about a natural spike protein, but an illegally developed synthetically made pathogen that has been optimized for human infection. The spike protein mRNA with the instructions to human cells to produce this very pathogenic spike protein is one of the two crucial building blocks of the COVID-19 bioweapon. Now the delivery system, the NLPs, you know, the nanolipid particles that encapsulate the mRNA payload and deliver it into the interior of the cells. The propaganda term for this is fat globules. What did Boyle declare about it? Boyle declared that it is actually about a nanotechnology enhanced delivery platform. This technology is, as Boyle declared, paid for, developed, financed and conceived by the Pentagon and its research institute DARPA. This technology platform nanotechnology platform was not an afterthought. Doctor Boyle points out that the virus itself was aerosolized and engineered with nanotechnology from the very beginning. This indicates a long term program aimed at the application of advanced delivery systems. And this technology has been used in the COVID-19 injections. Boyle determined that the NLP delivery system in the injections is the result of a specific teacher sponsored program for nanotechnological biological weapons. In the presentation by Samsung you can read further about the legal implications of this. It is also argued that Gates and Borla qualify as suspects of crimes against humanity as defined in the Rome statute concerning the international criminal court.

Coronavirus, as a pathogen model, was identified in 1965 and seen as modifiable for various purposes. In 1966, it was used in a transatlantic biological experiment. By 1967, human trials began, inoculating people with modified versions. The common cold was turned into a chimera in the 1970s. By 1990, coronavirus was an industrial problem for dog and pig breeders, leading to Pfizer's first spike protein vaccine patent. However, from 1990 to 2018, research indicated coronavirus mutated too quickly for vaccines to be effective. In 2002, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill patented an "infectious replication defective" clone of coronavirus, funded by NIAID's Anthony Fauci, preceding SARS 1.0. SARS is engineered, not naturally occurring like the common cold.

Many viruses use a 2-step authentication process to enter cells, involving binding to a receptor and spike protein cleavage. Virologists have been adding furin cleavage sites to viruses since 1992, increasing their virulence. SARS-CoV-2, which likely originated from nature, contains unique furin cleavage site codons not typical in coronaviruses. This suggests a low probability of natural origin.

In 1965, coronavirus was identified as a pathogen that could be modified for various purposes. The first human manipulation experiment took place in 1966, followed by transatlantic data sharing in 1967. In the 1970s, coronavirus was modified in animals like pigs and dogs. By 1990, it was discovered that coronavirus caused gastrointestinal issues in dogs and pigs, leading to Pfizer filing the first spike protein vaccine patent. The spike protein was not a new problem, as it was known since 1990. Vaccines for coronavirus have been ineffective due to its ability to mutate quickly, as stated in numerous independent scientific publications. In 2002, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill patented an infectious replication defective clone of coronavirus, funded by Anthony Fauci. This suggests that SARS was engineered and not a naturally occurring phenomenon.

We isolated coronaviruses from animals in the past to understand their threat to other species by culturing them on different cell types. This process, known as gain of function, involves enriching mutants that can infect new species. The speaker emphasizes that mass vaccination in humans is a significant gain of function experiment, leading to virus evolution. This real-world experiment involves constant virus changes due to human-to-human transmission under vaccine pressure.

In 1965, coronavirus was identified as a pathogen that could be modified for various purposes. The first transatlantic coronavirus experiment took place in 1966, followed by human trials in 1967. In the 1970s, coronavirus was manipulated in animals, and by 1990, it was recognized as a problem for dogs and pigs. Pfizer filed the first spike protein vaccine patent in 1990. It was known since then that coronavirus mutates too quickly for vaccines to be effective. In 2002, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill patented an infectious replication defective clone of coronavirus, funded by Anthony Fauci. SARS 1.0 was engineered and not a naturally occurring phenomenon.

Animal viruses that jump to humans often struggle to infect effectively due to their evolution in animals. The first SARS virus in 2003 had a 10% mortality rate but only infected 8,000 people because it didn't adapt well to humans. In contrast, COVID-19 attached perfectly to humans, suggesting possible lab manipulation. Researchers used a supercomputer to find that the virus did not attach well to other animals, indicating it was pre-adapted for humans. Evidence points to a 2018 research project that aimed to create a virus similar to COVID-19. Despite this, obtaining records from the Biden administration has been challenging, even with bipartisan support for transparency. The situation remains frustrating, highlighting the need for further investigation.

Ralph Barrick from the University of North Carolina discusses synthetic genomics of SARS. He explains the structure and genome organization of the SARS coronavirus and its various proteins. Barrick then discusses the use of synthetic genomics as a platform to control emerging infectious diseases, particularly focusing on SARS. He explains the process of synthesizing a portfolio of spike glycoprotein genes to capture the heterogeneity of the virus. Barrick also discusses the use of synthetic deoptimization schemes to attenuate SARS pathogenesis and the rewiring of SARS coronavirus transcription circuits to further attenuate viral pathogenesis. He concludes by highlighting the potential of synthetic genomics and universal attenuation schemes for developing rapid response platforms and vaccines against emerging coronaviruses.

Coronavirus was isolated in 1965 and quickly identified as a pathogen for experimentation. In 1966, the first COV model was used in human manipulation experiments. By 1990, Pfizer patented a spike protein vaccine for coronavirus. Research showed vaccines were ineffective due to the virus mutating rapidly. In 2002, the University of North Carolina patented an infectious replication defective clone of coronavirus, funded by Anthony Fauci. This work preceded SARS 1.0 by a year, suggesting engineered origins.

Recent computer modeling from early 2020 suggested that the virus might be man-made. Initially, the goal was to design a vaccine, but the modeling revealed that the virus was surprisingly well-adapted to humans, raising questions about its origin. Instead of identifying an exotic animal, the research pointed to humans as the closest match for the virus's ACE2 receptor binding. This unexpected finding led to speculation about whether the virus had adapted in a lab setting or was an accidental release. The research faced challenges in publication due to its divergence from the prevailing narrative. Additionally, the presence of a furin cleavage site in the virus raised further concerns, as it appeared unnatural in the context of viral evolution.

Coronavirus was isolated in 1965 as one of the first infectious replicatable viral models, associated with the common cold. In 1966, the very first COV coronavirus model was used as a transatlantic biological experiment in human manipulation. In 1967, the first human trials on inoculating people with modified coronavirus were conducted. Between 1975 and 1977, we started modifying coronavirus by putting it into different animals, pigs and dogs. By 1990, Pfizer's first spike protein vaccine patent for coronavirus was filed. From 1990 to 02/2018, every publication on coronavirus vaccines concluded that coronavirus escapes the vaccine impulse because it mutates too quickly. In 02/2002, UNC Chapel Hill patented ‘an infectious replication defective clone of coronavirus’ funded by NIAID's Anthony Fauci from 1999 to 02/2002. That work allegedly preceded SARS-1; SARS is the research developed by humans weaponizing a life system model to attack human beings, patented in 02/2002.

Chinese researchers have created a super virus by combining a protein from bats with the SARS virus found in mice. This virus could potentially infect humans, although it is currently only being studied in laboratories. The debate over the risks of this research is not new, with some scientists arguing that the benefits outweigh the potential dangers. However, others are concerned about the possibility of the virus directly infecting humans without an intermediate species. The US government had previously suspended funding for research aiming to make viruses more contagious, but this did not stop the Chinese research on SARS. Some experts believe the chances of the virus spreading to humans are minimal compared to the potential benefits, while others disagree.

Ralph Barrick from the University of North Carolina discusses synthetic genomics of SARS in this video. He explains the structure and genome organization of the SARS coronavirus and its various proteins. Barrick also discusses the use of synthetic genomics as a platform to control emerging infectious diseases and develop vaccines. He presents the results of experiments involving the synthesis of different SARS virus strains and their ability to infect human airway cells. Barrick also discusses the use of deoptimized codons to attenuate SARS pathogenesis and the rewiring of SARS coronavirus transcription circuits to further attenuate viral pathogenesis. He concludes by highlighting the potential of synthetic genomics and universal attenuation schemes to rapidly produce candidate live virus vaccines for emerging pathogens.

COVID world 10/09/2022 reports estimated extra deaths of 31 million and estimated serious adverse effects of 1.9 billion for three years of SARS CoV-two virus and vaccine bioweapons. The two main differences with the previous estimates on 10/01/2022 are: First, 11 countries, for about 600,000,000 people, were added to the estimate base data. As such, the current estimate base data consists of 47 countries for about 2,300,000,000 people, making the current estimates more representative for the whole world. Second, for estimating the serious adverse effects the extra deaths of 2021 and 2022 are taken fully into account as input instead of half in the previous estimates. The extra deaths estimates for 2020, 2021, and 2022 are based on officially reported and factual deaths in the countries mentioned in the table below. For the source of all the used data see the Our World and Data links in the appendix. Extra deaths (see columns twenty twenty ED, twenty twenty one ED, and twenty twenty two ED in the table below) are calculated as the difference of the factual number of total deaths in the concerned year. The missing months of the incomplete 2022 year are estimated by extrapolation of the monthly average of all known months from January 2021 on. The for yearly evolution corrected average of the five preceding years 2015 to 2019. The yearly correction factor used is 0.75% and was calculated based on the evolution of the sum of deaths of all countries below in 2015 to 2019. For the 2020 ED estimate the correction factor 0.75 was three times (reference year twenty seventeen) applied on the five year average, for 2021 ED four times and for 2022 ED five times. In other words, the extra deaths estimates are in fact the excess deaths after correction for an expected yearly evolution and expected yearly without the mass vaccination and COVID bioweapons. Then to calculate the 2020 ED estimate for the world, first the column ED100 ks extra deaths per 100 ks people of the country is calculated. Then this column is aggregated which results in 112 extra deaths per 100 ks people. The latter value is applied on the world population which results into nine million extra deaths in 2020, the first year with the COVID bioweapon deployed. To calculate the 2021 ED estimate for the world, first the column ED21M doses, extra deaths per million doses given in the country, is calculated. This column is aggregated which results in nine sixty one extra deaths per million doses. The latter value is applied on the world doses which results into twelve point one million extra deaths in 2021, the first year with the vaccine bioweapon and second year with the COVID bioweapon deployed. To calculate the 2022 ED estimate for the world, first the column ED22M doses, extra deaths per million doses given in the country, is calculated. This column is aggregated which results in seven sixty three extra deaths per million doses. The latter value is applied on the world doses which results into nine point six million extra deaths in 2022, the second year with the vaccine bioweapon and third year with the COVID bioweapon deployed. Press CTRL plus four more image detail below. The estimate for people with serious adverse effects is calculated by multiplying the estimated extra deaths in 2021 and 2022 by an estimated ratio reported adverse effects/reported deaths after COVID vaccination. The ratio used is 87.6 and was calculated from the table Estimated probabilities after COVID vaccination for all ages in the article below. This results in an estimated one point one billion serious adverse effects for 2021 and zero point eight billion for 2022. Considering the estimated thirty one million extra deaths and estimated one point nine billion serious adverse effects for three years of deployed SARS CoV-two virus and vaccine bioweapons the words bioweaponized, propagandized, lured, coerced and mandated depopulation and genocide should not be taboo. Furthermore, there are about ten million extra deaths yearly worldwide since 2020. If these extra deaths are continued this will result in one hundred and ten million extra deaths by the end of 2030 from these bioweapons since 2020. For the sake of estimating, certain assumptions about the domain were introduced. If one or some of those assumptions would be far off target, for example as more data becomes available and is integrated in the estimation or some data appears faulty, the current estimates and trends could be seriously unvalidated. Because of the mass propaganda, corrupted science, lack of truthful science and censorship in the mainstream media and on tech platforms, thus the elites, many people still think SARS CoV-two is a naturally evolved virus. Truthful science though proves beyond any doubt SARS CoV-two is designed and made by humans in a biolab. After all and first of all, science shows the genetic code of SARS CoV-two contains several lab made inserts, not natural mutations or recombinations of natural viruses. Because these inserted codes PRRA (HIVGP120) are much too large and too many, and because these genetic codes only appear in other natural viruses that are genetically much too different from SARS CoV-two, the probability that SARS CoV-two has naturally mutated or recombined from other natural viruses is quasi zero. Furthermore, there exists a substantial trail of documents and testimonies, years before and after the release of SARS CoV-two about these genetic codes and the existing biochemical technology needed to insert them, financing of the research, scientific documents, patents. See the links below for sources and science. Doctor. Richard M. Fleming, MD, sworn testimony that COVID-nineteen is a bioweapon. Doctor. Richard Fleming on Montanier's discovery of HIV and spiked protein. The virus comes from a lab, appears from the Veritas Revelation Project. Are our scientists lying to us? SARS CoV-two is likely a lab construct. The origin of SARS CoV-two. Since the Genentech COVID vaccines make the human body cells produced during months up to years huge amounts than the average, dominantly only mucosal, infection with SARS CoV-two itself which for the majority of healthy unvaccinated people causes hardly any illness, just cold like symptoms, these Genentech COVID vaccines are of course themselves bioweapons and much worse than the virus itself. Furthermore, not only the produced toxic spike protein but also other components and contaminations of these vaccines are cause of serious health damage. See the links below for information about the devastating effects of the COVID vaccine bioweapons. Images, press CTRL plus for more image detail. The article COVID World 10/09/2022, estimated extra deaths thirty one million and estimated serious adverse effects 1,900,000,000 for three years of SARS CoV-two virus and vaccine bioweapons was written by Pak Osmol, 10/09/2022. Appendix A Data Source. Our World in Data Excess Mortality Raw Death Count. Click the Download tab below the graph on the displayed page. Downloaded CSV September 2022 from Our World in Data Excess Mortality Raw Death Count. Right click the link and then Save Link As.

Scientists sequence the virus and compare it to known pathogens like SARS. They discovered similar coronaviruses in bats and focused on the spike protein that attaches to cells. Chinese researchers created pseudoparticles with spike proteins from these viruses to test their binding to human cells. Each step of this process helps determine if the virus can become pathogenic in humans. Manipulating the spike protein in the lab is crucial for understanding the zoonotic risk. By obtaining the sequence, scientists can predict the virus's behavior more accurately.

In 2015, the National Library of Medicine published a study by 15 virologists and medical experts warning that SARS-like bat coronaviruses pose a potential threat to humans. The scientists, with decades of experience in studying coronaviruses, examined how SARS and MERS transmitted among humans. They modified a strain of coronavirus from Chinese horseshoe bats using gain of function technology and injected it into mice spinal cords. This study not only highlights the dangers of coronaviruses in bats but also demonstrates efforts to amplify the virus's contagion ability to better understand and prepare for future outbreaks.

Ralph Barrick from the University of North Carolina discusses synthetic genomics of SARS in this video. He explains the structure of the SARS coronavirus particle and its important glycoprotein spikes. Barrick also discusses the synthetic resurrection and reconstruction of various zoonotic SARS viruses and their applications in therapeutics and vaccine design. He touches on codon deoptimization as a way to attenuate SARS pathogenesis and rewiring SARS coronavirus transcription circuits as a universal strategy to attenuate viral pathogenesis. Barrick concludes by discussing the potential of synthetic genomics and transcription circuit redesign as a platform to control emerging infectious diseases and develop rapid response platforms for future epidemics.

Evolutionary virologists analyzed viral sequences from the current outbreak and in bats. They determined that the mutations required for the virus to jump from an animal to a human are entirely consistent with its evolutionary path. A paper detailing this research will be made available, although the authors are not currently named.

In 1965, coronavirus was identified as a pathogen that could be modified for various purposes. The first transatlantic coronavirus experiment took place in 1966, followed by human trials in 1967. The common cold was turned into a chimera in the 1970s, and by 1990, Pfizer filed the first spike protein vaccine patent for coronavirus. It was known since 1990 that coronavirus mutates too quickly for vaccines to be effective. In 2002, the University of North Carolina patented an infectious replication defective clone of coronavirus, funded by Anthony Fauci. This preceded SARS 1.0, suggesting it was not a naturally occurring phenomenon. SARS was engineered as a weapon against humans.

Researchers have discovered various coronaviruses in bats, including ones similar to SARS. They focused on the spike protein, which attaches to cells, and conducted experiments in China. By inserting spike proteins from these viruses into pseudoparticles, they tested their ability to bind to human cells. This process allowed them to understand the potential pathogenicity of the virus in humans.

The speakers discuss the possibility of the Sarscov 2 virus being a laboratory-made chimera. They mention that it is possible to create a virus in the lab that is indistinguishable from a natural one. They also mention a database created by Professor Shi, containing information on over 20,000 bat and rodent viruses. The database included details such as GPS coordinates, virus type, and whether the virus was sequenced or isolated. However, the webpage containing this information was removed from the web in June 2020.

The discussion focuses on viral “families” that include viruses transmitted from animals to humans, narrowing the search immediately. When a newly sequenced virus resembles a relative of a known “nasty pathogen” (as was done with SARS), researchers find related viruses in bats, including many coronaviruses, some of which look very similar to SARS. To evaluate which viruses might be capable of infecting people, the spike protein—described as the protein that attaches to cells—is sequenced. Colleagues in China then create pseudoparticles and insert the spike proteins from these bat viruses into the pseudoparticles to test whether they bind to human cells. The process is described as stepwise: each experimental step moves closer to determining whether a virus could become pathogenic in people, narrowing the field, reducing costs, and leaving a small number of viruses that “really do look like killers.” The final step is to assess exposure in humans by looking for specific antibodies. Researchers check people living in the region where the animal host lives and who are exposed to the virus, asking whether they have antibodies specifically against it.

Joseph Sanson presents the statement based on the sworn statement of the late Professor Doctor Francis Boyle, who he says is the greatest authority in bioweapons legislation and the author of it. Sanson claims Boyle knew that the covert nineteen mRNA injection is a bio weapon and that Boyle declared this to the world before his death, which Sanson says occurred despite Boyle being in good health and willing to testify under oath in court. The core of Boyle’s argument, as Sanson relays, is that the COVID-19 mRNA injections contain derivatives of illegal military gene function research, and as a result, the injections qualify by definition as a military biological weapon system, a bioweapon. This bioweapon is said to have two integrated components: the pathogenic load and the delivery mechanism. Sanson asserts it is beyond doubt that the pathogenic load is the product of illegal gene or function research. He references an article in Nature Medicine cited by Boyle, noting that the article’s warning indicates true scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus, and that what is called the “new normal” are not scientists but faith fanatics behind whom the respondents hide. The Nature Medicine article, published in 2015, is described as stating that a cluster of circulating coronaviruses in bats similar to SARS shows potential for human infection, and that the researchers synthetic created an infectious fully SHC zero fourteen recombinant virus with robust viral replication in vitro and in vivo, with a SARS-like coronavirus having a spike protein optimized for human infection. Sanson names researchers affiliated with UNC Chapel Hill and the Wuhan Institute of Virology as authors of that article. According to Boyle, the spike protein mRNA, with instructions to human cells to produce the pathogenic spike protein, is one of the two crucial building blocks of the COVID-19 bioweapon. The other building block is the delivery system, the nanolipid particles (NLPs) that encapsulate the mRNA payload and deliver it into cells, referred to in propaganda as fat globules. Boyle is said to have declared that this delivery system is a nanotechnology enhanced platform paid for, developed, financed, and conceived by the Pentagon and its research institute DARPA. The technology platform is described as not an afterthought, with Boyle stating that the virus itself was aerosolized and engineered with nanotechnology from the beginning, indicating a long-term program applying advanced delivery systems, and that this technology has been used in the COVID-19 injections. Boyle’s presentation is also presented as arguing that Gates and Borla qualify as suspects of crimes against humanity as defined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

In the lab, it's easy to manipulate spike proteins, which play a significant role in the zoonotic risk of coronaviruses. By obtaining the sequence and constructing the protein, we collaborated with Ralph Barrick at UNC to insert it into another virus. This allows us to conduct experiments and enhance our ability to predict outcomes based on specific sequences.

We focus on viral families that have transmitted from animals to humans. When we find a virus that resembles a known dangerous pathogen, like SARS, we examine its spike protein, which attaches to cells. Chinese researchers create pseudo particles with these spike proteins to test if they bind to human cells. This process helps us identify viruses that could potentially be harmful to humans. By narrowing down the field and reducing costs, we end up with a small number of viruses that appear to be dangerous. We then investigate if people living in the same region as the animals carrying these viruses have developed antibodies.