More from Billy Bostickson 🏴👁&👁 🆓
PCR Drosten Fail Compilation
1. Ten Fatal Errors: Scientists Attack Paper That Established Global PCR Driven Lockdown
https://t.co/25p88F2xu6
2. Review report Corman-Drosten et al.
https://t.co/8rlT4MWoyI
3. Consequences of false
PCR Drosten Fail Compilation
4. Files for download
https://t.co/SqDrZjB9em
5. Addendum
https://t.co/IygCWvnAsP
6. False positives in reverse transcription PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2
https://t.co/HxpSZkzZ7Q
7. Discussion on Retraction
PCR Drosten Fail Compilation
8. 124 Tweet Thread by Bobby Rajesh Malhotra
@Bobby_Network
https://t.co/cdot5yIeuf
9. Another shorter thread by @Bobby_Network
https://t.co/kqFW9GsSeD
10. Thread by Abir Ballan
PCR Drosten Fail Compilation
11. Mini Thread by @Kevin_McKernan
https://t.co/pntydnd80L
12. Another longer thread by @Kevin_McKernan
https://t.co/5hBYIlXFnQ
13.
1. Ten Fatal Errors: Scientists Attack Paper That Established Global PCR Driven Lockdown
https://t.co/25p88F2xu6
2. Review report Corman-Drosten et al.
https://t.co/8rlT4MWoyI
3. Consequences of false
PCR Drosten Fail Compilation
4. Files for download
https://t.co/SqDrZjB9em
5. Addendum
https://t.co/IygCWvnAsP
6. False positives in reverse transcription PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2
https://t.co/HxpSZkzZ7Q
7. Discussion on Retraction
PCR Drosten Fail Compilation
8. 124 Tweet Thread by Bobby Rajesh Malhotra
@Bobby_Network
https://t.co/cdot5yIeuf
9. Another shorter thread by @Bobby_Network
https://t.co/kqFW9GsSeD
10. Thread by Abir Ballan
PCR Drosten Fail Compilation
11. Mini Thread by @Kevin_McKernan
https://t.co/pntydnd80L
12. Another longer thread by @Kevin_McKernan
https://t.co/5hBYIlXFnQ
13.
1/x Fort Detrick History
Mr. Patrick, one of the chief scientists at the Army Biological Warfare Laboratories at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md., held five classified US patents for the process of weaponizing anthrax.
2/x
Under Mr. Patrick’s direction, scientists at Fort Detrick developed a tularemia agent that, if disseminated by airplane, could cause casualties & sickness over 1000s mi². In a 10,000 mi² range, it had 90% casualty rate & 50% fatality rate
3/x His team explored Q fever, plague, & Venezuelan equine encephalitis, testing more than 20 anthrax strains to discern most lethal variety. Fort Detrick scientists used aerosol spray systems inside fountain pens, walking sticks, light bulbs, & even in 1953 Mercury exhaust pipes
4/x After retiring in 1986, Mr. Patrick remained one of the world’s foremost specialists on biological warfare & was a consultant to the CIA, FBI, & US military. He debriefed Soviet defector Ken Alibek, the deputy chief of the Soviet biowarfare program
https://t.co/sHqSaTSqtB
5/x Back in Time
In 1949 the Army created a small team of chemists at "Camp Detrick" called Special Operations Division. Its assignment was to find military uses for toxic bacteria. The coercive use of toxins was a new field, which fascinated Allen Dulles, later head of the CIA
Mr. Patrick, one of the chief scientists at the Army Biological Warfare Laboratories at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md., held five classified US patents for the process of weaponizing anthrax.
2/x
Under Mr. Patrick’s direction, scientists at Fort Detrick developed a tularemia agent that, if disseminated by airplane, could cause casualties & sickness over 1000s mi². In a 10,000 mi² range, it had 90% casualty rate & 50% fatality rate
3/x His team explored Q fever, plague, & Venezuelan equine encephalitis, testing more than 20 anthrax strains to discern most lethal variety. Fort Detrick scientists used aerosol spray systems inside fountain pens, walking sticks, light bulbs, & even in 1953 Mercury exhaust pipes
4/x After retiring in 1986, Mr. Patrick remained one of the world’s foremost specialists on biological warfare & was a consultant to the CIA, FBI, & US military. He debriefed Soviet defector Ken Alibek, the deputy chief of the Soviet biowarfare program
https://t.co/sHqSaTSqtB
5/x Back in Time
In 1949 the Army created a small team of chemists at "Camp Detrick" called Special Operations Division. Its assignment was to find military uses for toxic bacteria. The coercive use of toxins was a new field, which fascinated Allen Dulles, later head of the CIA
Meat is high in Glycosaminoglycans
(central to coronavirus's ability to attach to host cells)
Beef, pork poultry, seafood are rich in heparan sulfate (glycosaminoglycans), highly charged anchors for SARSCoV2
Meat surfaces critical factors for transmission
https://t.co/yP6lH22OTF
1/5 Science behind that tweet just in case anyone thinks I speak without awareness ;)
Glycosaminoglycans from fresh water fish processing discard - Isolation, structural characterization, and osteogenic activity
https://t.co/fyjac03IuV
SALMON MOUTHS
2/5 Salmon Mouths 2
Characterization of Glycosaminoglycans in Gaping and Intact Connective Tissues of Farmed Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Fillets by Mass
3/5 Why does SARS-COV-2 like meat & seafood?
Glycosaminoglycan binding motif at S1/S2 proteolytic cleavage site on spike glycoprotein may facilitate novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) host cell entry
https://t.co/DpHF1WmxeG
Glycosaminoglycans and
4/5 Glycosaminoglycans
Role of in Infectious Disease
(same authors as above)
https://t.co/3q5dn2Io3Q
Glycosaminoglycans in Infectious Disease
https://t.co/Dep7aJlpLP
Murine Coronavirus with an Extended Host Range Uses Heparan Sulfate as an Entry
(central to coronavirus's ability to attach to host cells)
Beef, pork poultry, seafood are rich in heparan sulfate (glycosaminoglycans), highly charged anchors for SARSCoV2
Meat surfaces critical factors for transmission
https://t.co/yP6lH22OTF
1/5 Science behind that tweet just in case anyone thinks I speak without awareness ;)
Glycosaminoglycans from fresh water fish processing discard - Isolation, structural characterization, and osteogenic activity
https://t.co/fyjac03IuV
SALMON MOUTHS
2/5 Salmon Mouths 2
Characterization of Glycosaminoglycans in Gaping and Intact Connective Tissues of Farmed Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Fillets by Mass
3/5 Why does SARS-COV-2 like meat & seafood?
Glycosaminoglycan binding motif at S1/S2 proteolytic cleavage site on spike glycoprotein may facilitate novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) host cell entry
https://t.co/DpHF1WmxeG
Glycosaminoglycans and
4/5 Glycosaminoglycans
Role of in Infectious Disease
(same authors as above)
https://t.co/3q5dn2Io3Q
Glycosaminoglycans in Infectious Disease
https://t.co/Dep7aJlpLP
Murine Coronavirus with an Extended Host Range Uses Heparan Sulfate as an Entry
More from Tech
There has been a lot of discussion about negative emissions technologies (NETs) lately. While we need to be skeptical of assumed planetary-scale engineering and wary of moral hazard, we also need much greater RD&D funding to keep our options open. A quick thread: 1/10
Energy system models love NETs, particularly for very rapid mitigation scenarios like 1.5C (where the alternative is zero global emissions by 2040)! More problematically, they also like tons of NETs in 2C scenarios where NETs are less essential. https://t.co/M3ACyD4cv7 2/10
In model world the math is simple: very rapid mitigation is expensive today, particularly once you get outside the power sector, and technological advancement may make later NETs cheaper than near-term mitigation after a point. 3/10
This is, of course, problematic if the aim is to ensure that particular targets (such as well-below 2C) are met; betting that a "backstop" technology that does not exist today at any meaningful scale will save the day is a hell of a moral hazard. 4/10
Many models go completely overboard with CCS, seeing a future resurgence of coal and a large part of global primary energy occurring with carbon capture. For example, here is what the MESSAGE SSP2-1.9 scenario shows: 5/10
Energy system models love NETs, particularly for very rapid mitigation scenarios like 1.5C (where the alternative is zero global emissions by 2040)! More problematically, they also like tons of NETs in 2C scenarios where NETs are less essential. https://t.co/M3ACyD4cv7 2/10
There is a lot of confusion about carbon budgets and how quickly emissions need to fall to zero to meet various warming targets. To cut through some of this morass, we can use some very simple emission pathways to explore what various targets would entail. 1/11 pic.twitter.com/Kriedtf0Ec
— Zeke Hausfather (@hausfath) September 24, 2020
In model world the math is simple: very rapid mitigation is expensive today, particularly once you get outside the power sector, and technological advancement may make later NETs cheaper than near-term mitigation after a point. 3/10
This is, of course, problematic if the aim is to ensure that particular targets (such as well-below 2C) are met; betting that a "backstop" technology that does not exist today at any meaningful scale will save the day is a hell of a moral hazard. 4/10
Many models go completely overboard with CCS, seeing a future resurgence of coal and a large part of global primary energy occurring with carbon capture. For example, here is what the MESSAGE SSP2-1.9 scenario shows: 5/10
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
