Former get rich grifter Dan Bilzerian has seemingly become pretty based by calling out not only Israel but the Satanic Jewish religion.
Could this all be a psyop? Are they throwing Jews under the bus now while Satanists and Freemasons continue to rule? Or is this part of the great unveiling of Revelation as the masses wake up?
Red light at night is calming and the opposite of demonic.
Speak of the devil.
It's white people (and wignat types) who create this funny and vague definition of white people.
It's pan-European when it suites you, other times it is not when you want to exclude a group doing poorly.
You can see with your own eyes the same phenotypes expressed as the rest of Europe. They don't have a completely different genome.
Christ calls us to first hate our own sin and repent. Then we can look on the sinner with compassion because we were once in such a sorry state.
A Jewish sinner is no worse or better than a Gentile sinner. They just have more power with which to exploit people.
There may be something there. I'm of the opinion they tested various nano-tech in select batches which they monitored.
There will likely be some short term deflation as the housing bubble bursts. Long term, inflation is the trend.
How to prepare for that? I really don't know, besides pray.
I can't say their results are necessarily wrong, but that recent study from Japan by Broudy and Lee was hot garbage. For a study that important there is no excuse for botching it like that.
It was not only horribly written and badly in need or an editor (could easily be cut down to 50% or less of the current page total) but it even lacked a control group for the most important part of the study. I don't think it is possible for research to be that bad except for deliberately.
That idiot Neo and a few others literally said that. I'm just calling it out. If it's not you, why chime in?
No. Stop being a faggot.
Still no counter argument because you couldn't read or comprehend even the reddit comment, let alone read the criticism by a spectroscopic. Stay in your lane, you aren't good at this stuff.
You still think he said the vaccine was sugar. 🤣🤣 It's an ingredient you low IQ moron.
You're scientifically illiterate and can't form a coherent argument.
I asked a legitimate question to ascertain what the fuck you are even trying to argue. You are truly a moron with a giant ego and no background in these sciences.
You don't understand the "it" that he was referring to, so your "it" is different. You think he said the entire vaccine is sugar. Therefore you're a fucking idiot.
This guy also didn't die from sugar - https://communities.win/c/TrueChristianity/p/1995CQBlf3/those-of-you-who-think-the-vacci/c
Ok I am out of patience. You're an idiot if you think this person said the vaccine is only sugar. That didn't happen.
Japanese study proves Pfizer and Moderna shots contain entities that assemble themselves in complex structures - https://communities.win/c/TrueChristianity/p/19957kg1BP/nanobots-in-covid-shots-that-ass/c
That study (which I read and you didn't because you're scientifically illiterate) didn't have a control group on the main part of the study (the long incubation period showing growth). That's deliberate malfeasance.
Spanish scientists exposed the Graphene Oxide in covid shots using Raman spectroscopy. La Quinta Columna has over 1000 scientists, who have collaborated for this information with over 1000 hours of research combined. - https://odysee.com/@ekab:2/VID_20220326_082809_583:f
That's exactly the study which spectroscopic Geoff Pain was criticizing for not ruling out sugar in the Raman spectra.
I'm still waiting for an actual scientific argument.
So the "it" you're referring to is the Raman spectrum? Is that correct?
Then your argument is saying you're certain the spectrum was for graphene and not sugar? Please elaborate to back up that argument, if it is in fact what you're trying to say. You haven't made any clear scientific argument.
You're just being vague.
He didn't say graphene is sugar.
I don't. You made the claim he said that.
for a skeptic they'll require more proof.
Actual proof is needed to make a strong claim. When you have multiple liars saying it is graphene, but no proper studies that can withstand peer review, why still believe it is in there?
Articles admitting GO is used in other experiential products doesn't prove it is in these shots. That's still speculation. I admit, they could be putting that stuff into some shots for experimentation, but I'm not going to tell people I know it is in there.
Why did you think he said that?
It's not that things shouldn't be spelled out, it's that you're being vague. Communication should always be clear especially on complex topics.
I feel like I'm dealing with a narcissist who can't stand being questioned or proven wrong. Otherwise the hostility makes no sense.
"It's not sugar" doesn't make sense in the context of his argument. What do you think he said was sugar? What is the "it" you're referring to?
Some have suggested it is a sort of amyloid protein formation. But whatever it is, I have no reason to think it is graphene based.
Sugar desolves in most liquids. 100% sugar desolves in blood.
Sugar dissolves in water and blood, therefore what? What are you trying to refute with that?
you're as ridiculous as your post.
Resorting to attacks instead of making a clear point back to the science. Did you even read the article?
So no government agents prosecuted for violating the first amendment and changes by executive order.
It's not a great comparison, since people inherently trust things like flu shots and wouldn't even think to blame them for a stroke. Those old shots are more dangerous than people realized. Though likely still not as deadly as the new clot shots.