"The Electron Microscope Models Imagination Images"

File attachments: 
No votes yet
"The Electron Microscope Models Imagination Images"
Bodo & Mecit: Caught in the Virus 
"The Electron Microscope Models Imagination Images" [Part 1/4]
telegram translate:
Correction: We never claimed that the two-dimensional EM images shown represent modelling. Photos that are generated three-dimensionally using a given model represent models.
The photos, which supposedly show "viruses that cause disease," actually show typical structures of cells or artificial protein-fat-soap globules that are created when such mixtures are swirled around. Crucial to these photos is that the structures shown have never been characterized biochemically. In the structures shown, which are supposed to represent "viruses", no one was looking for the long piece of "genetic substance" that is referred to as the heart of a "virus", as a strand of genetic material or as the genome of the "virus".
"The Electron Microscope Models Imagination Images" [Part 2/4]
telegram translate:
How are these structures created?
  •  Cross-section of microvilli
  •  In the pellet, which consists of proteins and fats, by swirling (by absorbing and expelling), together with the detergents/solvents, soap bubbles (= micelles) are formed, which are mixed with dyes, dried and output as viruses in the EM.
  • EM images of a molecule coated with metal (evaporated).
  • RNA that wraps itself around certain proteins when they are present.
Virologists present typical artefacts of dying tissue/cells and typical structures that arise when cellular components such as proteins, fats and the solvents used are swirled around as viruses or viral components.
Non-virologists call these particles z. B. as phagosomes, endosomes, exosomes, liposomes, transport vesicles and in cross section as villi etc. pp.
"The Electron Microscope Models Imagination Images" [Part 3/4]
telegram translate:
Prof. Karlheinz Lüdtke, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Early History of Virology
 page. 51: "Damage was already observed during the first attempts to image biological objects using electron microscopy. And changes in the objects were described. This had triggered strong skepticism among many biologists about the results of the "over-microscope". "
"[...] "that our newly found structures would be artefacts created by vacuum or electron beams."
page. 52: "The use of electron microscopy seemed to cloud the picture of the nature of the virus rather than sharpening it. The results obtained with the new method, as Ruska explained in 1950, made it necessary to realize "that the virus types do not show any biological association .
"The Electron Microscope Models Imagination Images" [Part 4/4]
telegram translate:
The EM preparation process blurs the image and can create artefacts
Required preparations:
  • Contrast metals
  • Fixation (glutaraldehyde, paraffin, formaldehyde, osmium teroxide or epoxy resin)
  • Heat-resistant sample
  • Dehydration (often dry freezing/ethanol)
  • Dyeing (heavy metals & even radioactive metals, uranyl acetate / lead citrate)
To do this, tissues must be embedded in synthetic resin, fully dehydrated, dyed with heavy metals, and then cut into very thin slices. But what happens is that tissues and cells change as a result of dehydration. In addition, the high-energy electron beam burns substances in the tissue and cells in the very thin layers. This always results in the same patterns, which are output as real images of cells despite obvious contradictions.
Bodo & Mecit: Caught in the Virus Narrative
"Definitely Next Level"  -https://t.me/AllesAusserMainstream/33440      & 
"Once Upon a Time the Measles Bag of Tricks" -https://t.me/AllesAusserMainstream/33445
( German)
With this post we reply to the two posts by Bodo & Mecit [Part 1/2]
telegram translate 
When even our critics begin to criticize publications previously claimed by themselves as evidence of the measles virus in the measles virus trial, then we are close and almost there. But first things first...
The missing adjacent section planes
       1.  The missing slice planes we named in this NL post ( see attachment) apply to anything that is output as a spherical particle! A glance at any publication would have been enough to become aware of this fact.
➖ Example here is also the well-known image of the RKI under the then head of electron microscopy Prof. Hans R. Gelderblom.
➖ This also applies to study no. 3 Nakai, M. & Imagawa, D.T. (1969) Electron microscopy of measles virus replication. Journal of Virology, 3(2): 187-197.
       2.   The image we used in our post from the publication Daikoku, E., Morita, C., Kohno, T. & Sano, K. (2007) Analysis of morphology and infectivity of measles virus particles is the 6th publication that was claimed in the Measles Virus Trial (MVP) as evidence of the measles virus. Bodo and Mecit confirm in their own post that this work is absolutely unscientific - and thus agree with us and our statements in this regard.
This work was before the Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart and was secured by "vaccinate-no-thank you" among others. 
(here to the publication-   https://impfen-nein-danke.de/u/532daikoku.pdf )
Publications in the MVP may not be described as scientific.
        3.   Publication #6 was rightly written by Dr. Stefan Lanka in the measles virus trial as unscientific, since the "Bulletin of the Osaka Medical College" is a rather peripheral journal that at the time could not even come up with an impact factor. The journal's self-description on its website suggests that no peer review takes place, only an internal examination. The journal is primarily used by members of the Osaka Medical College to communicate their findings.
Despite this knowledge!
          4.   The court-appointed expert Prof. Dr. dr Podbielski testified that in the two publications [No. 5 (Horikami & Moyer, 1995) and Publication No. 6 (Daikoku et al., 2007)], which contained crucial evidence for the existence of the measles virus, evidence for the causality of the measles virus and its diameter determination. Especially because they are more recent and the latest techniques were used to work on them.
The 6th study (Daikoku et al., 2007) that Mecit & Bodo chalk up here is the one that was given in the measles virus process as evidence for the diameter determination. In doing so, the expert ignored the unscientific nature of this work, which was obvious to everyone.

! Mecit and Bodo have now apparently recognized this, and thus also indirectly confirmed that the proof in the MVP was clearly NOT provided by the publications presented.
Diameter specifications are unscientific
       5. Bodo & Mecit agree with us that the diameter specifications and the resulting deviations of 50 - 1000nm are unscientific. They confirm - presumably without knowing it - both Dr. Lanka, as well as us, that the work presented in the measles virus process cannot be described as scientific.
        6.  We didn't pick these (quote Mecit: most absurd) publications, but these works are claimed by all virus advocates as evidence in the measles virus trial. But as it turns out now for Mecit, Bodo & Co. - they obviously see it now: these works are MURKS!
With this post we reply to the two posts by Bodo & Mecit [PART 2/2]
telegram translate
Even newer EM techniques do not make up for the suppression of decisive factors
     7.  The attempt by Bodo & Mecit to bring the entire virus evidence level to the topic of electron microscopy suppresses the crucial fact that the structures shown in these photos were never characterized biochemically. In the structures shown, which are supposed to represent "viruses", no one has ever searched for the long piece of "genetic substance" that is referred to as the heart of a "virus", as a strand of genetic material or as the genome of the "virus", neither in the past decades , still today.
    8.  Misinterpretations when identifying structures under the electron microscope are not uncommon. An example from 2020 confirms this again and warns that the utmost caution is required when identifying "coronaviruses" using electron microscopy. As stated in their publication "Caution in Identifying Coronaviruses by Electron Microscopy":
"In the article by Farkash et al.8, the electron micrographs in their Figures 3, A–C do not show coronaviruses. Rather, the structures described as virus are clathrin-coated vesicles (CCVs), normal subcellular organelles involved in intracellular transport are."
Time and again it has been confirmed that identifying structures simply by looking at them under the electron microscope is completely inadequate and, in specific examples, can be described as misinterpretation.
 Telegram contact person:
@KnowledgeNew Thought
 Subscribe to NL channel