1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, clearly it had to be GHz.

With all due respect, you clearly said GB multiple times, which isn't clearly GHz at all.

Really your entire response is showing what I initially stated, that you don't have a solid understanding of the science.

Here's some links to the citations you wanted: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-40942-8 (Graphene in 5G environment) https://www.nature.com/articles/nature26160 (Graphene as a superconductor)

Those papers did not confirm your original claim. So you were confusing several points in your statement about graphene oxide -> "It is important to note that Graphene Oxide becomes a SUPERCONDUCTOR when it reaches EM levels of just several GB."

Oh, you meant only graphene oxide... Fine here's a link - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0254058419310673

No, you said Graphene Oxide, it wasn't about what I meant. And the paper you provided on GO didn't confirm your initial statement either.

So you're very unclear on the science you are stating, and you keep changing your story. These arguments you are making are getting long winded and are almost all not properly citing what specifically you needed to cite. So I'm done. But I appreciate your time.

2
TurnToGodNow 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nothing more hideous than cross fit pullups.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

It is important to note that Graphene Oxide becomes a SUPERCONDUCTOR when it reaches EM levels of just several GB.

GB? Are you sure you don't mean GHz?

Also do you have a citation for that, I've never heard that microwaving graphene oxide makes it a superconductor. I know that graphene by itself (no oxide) is a great conductor on its own. For graphene oxide I've read it can be a not so great conductor. Someone here asked a question about it on Research Gate, and apparently the less oxidized it is the better it can conduct, but graphene by itself would always be superior. https://www.researchgate.net/post/Whether_graphene_oxide_is_a_good_electrical_conductor_or_not

Doctors find these bubbles that connect as a network to be the graphene quantum dots.

I could use a citation on this.

Overall I don't think the way you are presenting this argument is clear or one thing following with another. A lot of what you mention applies to whether or not the parasite class wants to do or is planning to do all these things. Or course they are. The question I have is whether or not these particular shots causing their particular problems are graphene or graphene oxide by and large.

You mentioned a paper about magneto-proteins for mind control, I've seen that too. However it has nothing to do with graphene. I still think graphene could be a red herring or predictive programming. They will roll it out later, but for now they jump the gun on it.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

They don't bank on "one small injection", that's why they focus to "boost" as much as possible every single human.

Perhaps. Maybe they are adding more and more machinery to build a network. I can't say. I just think there needs to be more data on the graphene argument to make a compelling case. It's not a solid case yet for the long clots and I have my doubts. Though I also know they want to make people transhuman.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ok, I see. I wasn't clear on that follow up sentence. The "that" I was referring to is the stringification you showed in the video of carbon nanotubes under an electric field. Not production of graphene from carbon nanotubes, which was not in my mind.

The paper you showed confirmed my first sentence, "Graphene may be carbon, but it is a flat sheet and not a tube" which is what I'm seeing.

Also, although 5G used EMF (which includes an electromagnetic component) a microwave emf does not behave the same as a pure electric field, so it isn't certain such an effect would be produced by it unless the experiment uses emfs directly. Not to mention the fact it was using carbon nano tubes and not graphene molecules. I don't claim I know for sure all of what graphene can do, just saying there is insufficient evidence to conclusively say the rope clots are from that.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ok I'll bite. What claim do you think I made, and what in the article proved that wrong? Please quote me and the article.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeah, you don't even understand what I was saying to begin with about graphene and carbon nanotubes. Go back and re-read.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

The part of the paper where it draws a clear distinction between graphene and carbon nanotubes (as I did). They are not the same thing. It's in the first paragraph.

A few years back, Tour developed a process for “unzipping” carbon nanotubes so that they transformed into graphene.

They have to be transformed to be graphene (or vice versa). So you didn't read or comprehend the first paragraph of the source you used. You're completely talking out of your ass, with all due respect.

And you still haven't addressed the issue of the quantity of material. So I already dismantled your arguments (and alleged evidence) and you don't have a rebuttal besides getting mad.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't think your ignorance of carbon nanotubes and graphene reflects on your status with God. But your unwillingness to be humble and accept correction could be.

I think you're projecting, with all due respect. What I said in my comment is correct, you didn't understand your own source if you think it contradicts me.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

https://spectrum.ieee.org/graphene-and-carbon-nanotubes-two-great-materials-even-better-together - Here's a link where you can educate yourself more on Graphene nanotubes and how they require no additional material. Single atom layer nanotube, not whatever you were thinking.

That article just supported exactly what I was saying. I'm not going to bother with the rest of your arguments since you've proven you have no idea what you're talking about with regards to graphene and carbon nano tubes.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

If they actually said 99% and not 100%, ok. That's basically saying it is 100%.

How come you state that a "spike protein seems plausible to make rope-like structures"? Please explain

I already explained, since it is an amyloid forming protein when it breaks down. Some doctors have said the ropes could be amyloid formations.

Here's how graphene oxide can create these rope-like structures.

Those are carbon nano-tubes. Graphene may be carbon, but it is a flat sheet and not a tube. That also requires an electric field and a hell of a lot more material than could be inside a small injection.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't doubt they could have different chemicals in different vials. But I think it is strange La Quinta early on claimed it was 100% graphene and nothing else. No other groups were seeing just that.

Also graphene doesn't explain the rope like structures found in the blood while an amyloid forming protein like the spike protein seems plausible.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because you haven't gone down to skid row and asked anyone to stay in your guesthouse. Though probably for good reason.

2
TurnToGodNow 2 points ago +2 / -0

What a bizarre statement. Jesus rebuked the Jews for going their own way and becoming children of the devil. Yet you think that book is on their side. The Bible is the same book these modern devils want to lead people away from (and for you they successfully have).

You're a product of decades of anti-christ programming, Hollywood wants to lead you away from the Bible, not to it.

-2
TurnToGodNow -2 points ago +1 / -3

Not what the Bible states at all. But the Bible does state that God judges nations. The USA has followed a predictable course of idolatry into judgement.

-2
TurnToGodNow -2 points ago +1 / -3

People living after the flesh (racists) blame everything on immigration. But you folks always miss the part where your people rejected God and embraced hedonism and idolatry.

2
TurnToGodNow 2 points ago +3 / -1

They've already signaled that they plan a pandemic 2. They have most people's immune systems compromised with the jab and could start using their DEW (EMF) disease causing weapons via cell towers.

Hopefully they don't, I'd like to enjoy this year, at least somewhat. But the prophetic timeline isn't dictated by my whims, sadly.

2
TurnToGodNow 2 points ago +2 / -0

They also tested energy weapons on DEWey High School, as reported by local news reports of a "mystery illness" at the school. That was just two years before covid.

No toxin was ever found, yet there were clusters of neurological illness. Very strange. It was around the same time as Havana Syndrome at US Embassies.

2
TurnToGodNow 2 points ago +2 / -0

Seeing melted aluminium from the wheel rims pooled next to cars, hundreds of wiped out houses with green trees surrounding them like nothing happened. Burnt out cars, but plastic and trim left perfectly fine. Very reminiscent of the California fires, 2020 Aussie fires, recent canadian fires, and 9/11.

3
TurnToGodNow 3 points ago +3 / -0

He still exists, I saw one of his videos a couple months ago. He seemed like he was losing his mind and I commented as much. I think it was on Odysee. You may disagree but I calls it like I sees it.

He was going after Whitney Webb and just acting looping about it.

edit: iirc he seems to be close with Titus Frost now. But Titus seemed like he had lost the plot too. He is spending a lot of time just trolling Corbett Report comments and attacking people for not mentioning the Jews enough.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

The biblical standard of rape is that the woman reports it as such in a timely manner, going back to Leviticus. If two people are discovered fornicating and the woman did not cry out for help, the law states it was consensual. If she was crying out the man is treated as the rapist.

If it takes you 10 or 30 years to figure out something was rape, it is highly likely it wasn't.

Now you are throwing in sexual assault. Yes I wouldn't be surprised if a porn star groped someone, but 12 actual rapes unreported I find hard to believe.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not gullible, I apply the same standards equally. If a nazi guard is charged 80 years later when he is 90, I cannot call that a fair trial. Same for this one. You have an old rich Jew about the die, and a lot of women who will likely get a pay day.

Victims have an obligation to report crimes soon after they happen. Unless they are being threatened by the mob, I don't see an excuse. Unless of course, they didn't have any issues with the encounter at the time then changed their mind later after the social climate changed (or made up an encounter which no one can prove 30 or 40 years later). This is just my intuition on the matter. Yes let the facts come out, but how reliable will they be so many years later.

4
TurnToGodNow 4 points ago +4 / -0

"BuT WhY WoUlD ThEy dEpOpUlAtE ThE ObEdIeNt pEoPlE?"

Because you're the people who listened to the genocidal maniacs.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›