Thread by @ReusVisser

Virus denialist Andrew Kaufman recently released a new video on Bitchute called DR. ANDREW KAUFMAN ON THE FAKE DELTA VARIANT. He elaborates on the familiar metaphor of comparing the human genome to a book, with words, sentences and paragraphs. 1/n bitchute.com/video/zxOtsL63…

The analogy goes like this: genomes are compiled from millions of reads (words), tiny RNA fragments. These reads are combined into contigs (sentences, paragraphs), and these in turn are combined into a hypothetical whole book. His question: how do we know this book exists? 2/n

In his understanding, contrary to human genomes, viral genomes are completely computer generated, arbitrary and artificially constructed. Millions of words are put together to form sentences and paragraphs, though, without any example we don't know if that makes any sense. 3/n

He gives the example of the very short phrase "writing in", which can be culled from many different books (The War of the Worlds, 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and so on), and can be used in many, even nonsensical sentences. How do we know which book it really came from, he asks us. 4/n

Now this is all very disingenious. Stefan Lanka often uses the same sleight of hand. This only works with VERY SHORT WORDS - in this example "writing in" makes up 10 characters only, including the space. Taken out of context, it is impossible to determine their true source. 5/n

But guess what, when we take slightly longer strings of characters, such as "teaching reading and writing", "writing in a foolish facetious tone" or "he began writing in my study", the situation changes dramatically. These phrases are identifiably unique to a particular book. 6/n

The analogy both Kaufman and Lanka continuously use to confuse their audience spectacularly backfires, because in whole genome sequencing even the smallest reads or words are much, much longer than that. What is more, multiple copies overlap, which gives us more confidence. 7/n

So though it might indeed seem incredible that modern scientists can assemble a 30.000 base viral SARS-CoV-2 genome from millions of short reads coming from various types of organisms, this is exactly what is feasible. Questioning this is a simple case of freshman skepticism. 8/n

Kaufman bluffs in this video that Stefan Lanka has already given proof of the total arbitrariness of viral genomes by being able to produce a viral genome even in the absence of a virus - but that revolutionary paper still awaits the light of day, as far as I can tell. 9/n

How does Kaufman interpret the many viral variants that science has identified? In his (mis)understanding, variants are failed attempts at reproducing the original SARS-CoV-2 genome, which is no surprise to him, because there is no index virus in the first place. 10/n

So while Kaufman acknowledges the reality of human genomes - they are based on actual organisms and can reliably be reproduced -- he questions the reality of viral genomes, because they are based on a mixture of sources, cannot be reproduced and are entirely theoretical. 11/n

In reality BOTH human and viral genomes are based on real organisms, are highly reproducible (within margins) and are theoretical reconstructions of actual, natural realities. It is unfathomable how Kaufman can frame these results as proof for the non-existence of viruses. 12/n

So if the Delta variant, which has become dominant now in many Western countries, is just another “failure to reproduce the original index genome”, how come all these thousands of Delta “failures” miraculously all point in the same direction - if it is not a real variant? 14/n

Indeed, one would expect a huge amount of meaningless noise in the sequencing data without a clear signal. Yet, what we consistently get to see is a real new variant that shows up again and again, and has almost completely replaced earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants. 15/n

What is more, this new Delta variant has a specific set of mutations that predictably changes its behavior: its infectiousness or how efficiently it can bind to the various human cells that share the same receptor. Weird, huh? 16/n

It looks like only a massive data blindness can cause virus denialists like Andrew Kaufman to deny these data. Yet this “medical authority” now reaches an audience of millions through his appearance this week on the Info Wars show of Alex Jones. 17/n

“MIT Scientist Exposes Covid-19 Hoax in Bombshell Interview – MUST SEE!” is the screaming headline. Alex Jones, looking quite lost before a table with dozens of copies of news articles, looks up to Andrew Kaufman, “author of many books”, as his final mentor on virology. 18/n

If Andrew Kaufman is your hope of winning the Info Wars, then you are really lost. I have never seen a more conceited, misinformed and misleading speaker on the current pandemic, hankering for attention of the gullible, but hiding from confrontations with real scientists. 20/n

An extended version of this thread can be read in Part 31 of THE CORONA CONSPIRACY series.

https://twitter.com/ReusVisser/status/1418945947820871680