What's interesting the black mirror that we use to access technology. (monitors and screens)

The symbols used for electronic components are very similar to symbols of alchemy

If you use technology you are using the electrical components that have alchemy.

Can't be responding on this board and consider it a "natural process."

measured Raman spectrum of benzene, where the peaks at 3,063, 2,950, 1,586, 1,177, 992 and 606 cm −1

Here we go. 1,586 G-peak in benzene ring is the same G-peak in graphene/graphite ring.

However, benzene have only one ring, there are no connections with other rings. So it does not have 2D peak. But if you take naphtalene, made from two benzene rings, you suddenly get that 2D Raman peak around 3000 cm-1.

When you go to more benzenes connected together, like in anthracene or phenalene you get raman spectras with peaks also specific to graphite. Meanwhile some polycyclic hydrocarbons are coagulants and could be a reason for blood clots. Unlike graphene.

Doing raman spectrometry with complex unknown substance, you get a lot of peaks everywhere, you don't get that nice two-peak picture from pure graphite/graphene even if graphite/graphene present in specimen. And they would not be that sharp and visible as on pictures you look at in a paper about pure graphene. You will obviously have peaks from all bonds of all substances at once. Including water. It will be a complete mess.

To make Raman spectrometry useful you have to find composition first. Then, thoroughly separate ingridiens and do a raman spectrometry on them separately to find out bonds you have. Then, using chemical formula and what bonds used to connect atoms in it you finally could determine what exact substance you have.

Raman spectrometry don't give you composition, it gives you what bonds you have. In case of simple compounds, you will be able to figure out that, say, there is water, table salt and some organic. But with such thing as vaccine where lot of stuff mixed, it is impossible to do any conclusions from Raman spectra you get. Well, in best case you will be able to tell that there is a lot of water in it. May be salt will be also obvious.

To clearly find out graphene among other organic and inorganic substances in water with Raman spectrometry you will need a suspension where graphene overhelmingly prevail over all other stuff, so G and 2D peaks will be comparable to peaks from water and salt. It will be grey or even black liquid, not that clear solution we see,

The table top devices for typical quadrupole mass spec wouldn't be useful here since they would just tell you the relative amounts of carbon, oxygen, etc.

Exactly. This gives the first and basic clue about composition of substance on atomic and submolecular level. It allow you to get preliminary information for chromatography and chemical tests for specific substances. If you have carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, lead and iron, you don't need to look for arsenic compounds or cesium. But force you to look for cyanides and lead compounds.

How could you tell if graphene is present with that information?

You will have high relative amount of carbon, much higher than for hydrocarbons or carbonates.

Also, just think why they so stick to that graphene stuff. Graphene is one of greatest nothingburger of science. It is known for around century, but still we don't have any more or less useful use of that substanse other than fill MSM articles and empty scientific papers.

Of course, talking about some polyhexamethylene guanidine in vaccines or sodium ethylmercurithiosalicylate will not create attention from regular public, but overhyped graphene will.

Also, graphene narrative as microblades in vaccine that cut everything in bloodstream directly contradicts blood clots facts. You can't create a clot with something that cut objects in pieces. But some uninterestin calcium hydrocarboaluminate (widely used coagulant) or other complex calcium compounds or, say, synthesized thrombines, easily could be the reason.

And, suddenly, you need mass-spectrometer to detect calcium in specimen to get a clue where to look for if you want to find a reason of blood clots.

Don't you understand that whole anti-vaccinehoax publications just does not fit together and with known facts about not-a-vaccine. It is just insane - "who cares why blood clots is a main consequence of not-a-vaccine, look, GRAPHENE!!!!".

Unscientific, non-systematic, self-contradictory "studies" floating around on non-official side with all that overhyped "nano", "graphene", "aluminium" and other keywords just make things worse.

So how do you know that he tested the covid vaccine when he himself doesn´t know it?

Science, how does it work?