How about you show me that they 100% aren't quantum dots? See, the problem with people like you is that you are stuck on debating each crumb, instead of acknowledging the existence of a whole cake. There are multiple facets to this whole mess, by design, meant to sow chaos/confusion. There are multiple agendas going on, with multiple iss…
How about you show me that they 100% aren't quantum dots? See, the problem with people like you is that you are stuck on debating each crumb, instead of acknowledging the existence of a whole cake. There are multiple facets to this whole mess, by design, meant to sow chaos/confusion. There are multiple agendas going on, with multiple issues (Pfizer has 50% leeway for "vaccine" content, and there is seemingly multiple formulations at any given time, even under the same lot number, which is illegal, btw) so anyone focusing on one crumb gets pulled apart and destroyed.
No. I am not going to waste time providing "just one patent", because "just one patent" will not prove or disprove anything, as I stated before. It's a compilation of THOUSANDS of patents, $ trails, FOIA'ed emails between government officials, military documents, following the $ between shady corporations, and the psychopaths IN THEIR OWN WORDS...and so on. Nope, I decided long ago that the only way people would know it is to seek it, research it, and follow the rabbit holes, like I did. I have no interest in debating the crumbs. It's lazy. And boring.
You originally stated that citing Karen Kingston loses all credibility based on one patent she held up. That's like saying one document from the 80,000 pages of Pfizer data that was forced to be released is "wrong" because, blah blah blah (meaning: "I didn't bother to read the other pages, I'm just going to focus on how you're wrong"). It's useless and time wasting.
IF you want to find the truth, you can use what Karen Kingston has to springboard off of, to find other documents. Is she perfect? No. Her research however, will lead you to other people, who also have crumbs. Each person out there has crumbs, that fit into the cake. Or not. That's your job to research and determine, along with the rest of us.
How about you show me that they 100% aren't quantum dots? See, the problem with people like you is that you are stuck on debating each crumb, instead of acknowledging the existence of a whole cake. There are multiple facets to this whole mess, by design, meant to sow chaos/confusion. There are multiple agendas going on, with multiple issues (Pfizer has 50% leeway for "vaccine" content, and there is seemingly multiple formulations at any given time, even under the same lot number, which is illegal, btw) so anyone focusing on one crumb gets pulled apart and destroyed.
No. I am not going to waste time providing "just one patent", because "just one patent" will not prove or disprove anything, as I stated before. It's a compilation of THOUSANDS of patents, $ trails, FOIA'ed emails between government officials, military documents, following the $ between shady corporations, and the psychopaths IN THEIR OWN WORDS...and so on. Nope, I decided long ago that the only way people would know it is to seek it, research it, and follow the rabbit holes, like I did. I have no interest in debating the crumbs. It's lazy. And boring.
You originally stated that citing Karen Kingston loses all credibility based on one patent she held up. That's like saying one document from the 80,000 pages of Pfizer data that was forced to be released is "wrong" because, blah blah blah (meaning: "I didn't bother to read the other pages, I'm just going to focus on how you're wrong"). It's useless and time wasting.
IF you want to find the truth, you can use what Karen Kingston has to springboard off of, to find other documents. Is she perfect? No. Her research however, will lead you to other people, who also have crumbs. Each person out there has crumbs, that fit into the cake. Or not. That's your job to research and determine, along with the rest of us.