Thread by @lasikeyecenter1

@ScienceMagazine @scipak DAY1, part 2.

So, Science. You agree? my questions are HARD? I mean, the answers are easy. proving the STRING MECHANISM wrong is virtually IMPOSSIBLE.

I mean, I ONLY start with their antigen. NOTHING else. No weirdness, no preservative, no mercury, JUST THEIR ANTIGEN.

@ScienceMagazine @scipak 1.02

Then? I ONLY use their BEST science, that an antibody will bind its antigen.

and i show them the PRECIPITINS in THEIR immunology textbooks. PRECIPITINS are polyclonal antibodies and its antigen clumped together in a meshwork, THEIR diagrams match my STRING MECHANISM.

@ScienceMagazine @scipak the AAPeds hasn't had an answer for over 125 days.

And I even call them baby killers after much careful reasoning. and yet, they are deathly afraid to block me or delete my 1200 posts.

@ScienceMagazine @scipak in SCIENCE, is refusing to answer difficult questions that are based on fundamental facts,

is that a scientific attitude?

Isn't the antibody from the 1st vaccine much more likely to bind the antigen from the booster vaccine than a real live virus? by a million times?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak The Chief Editor of the Journal of Immunology, Dr. Eugene Oltz was unable to come up with a scientific rebuttal and buried his head in the sand.

The Chief Editor of Nature, Magdalena Skipper, same thing.

Since Medical journals seem to be controlled by BIG PHARMA, here I am.

@ScienceMagazine @scipak SCIENCE, you're the last bastion of true science.

I'm hoping YOU don't also block me and delete my posts, but act like REAL SCIENTISTS who realize the gravity of the situation, yes, this STRING mechanism will bring down the vaccine industry.

@ScienceMagazine @scipak and what a shame if SCIENCE also decides to play politics and cave to BIG PHARMA, CONTRARY to REAL SCIENCE.

and? what is science for? i mean the DISCIPLINE of SCIENCE, not just your JOURNAL science.

I am asking because THIS String Mechanism? is at the HEART of

@ScienceMagazine @scipak what we all DO science for. The TRUE meaning of science? the TRUE purpose of science?

From my evolutionary biology perspective? Science is an amazing tool so we can figure out --

WHAT IS GOOD FOR OUR CHILDREN.

@ScienceMagazine @scipak There isn't a single editor at SCIENCE that can provide a better reason for why we have and use SCIENCE than to figure out what is GOOD FOR OUR CHILDREN.

and really, don't we all know? that sure, there's a lot of interesting things in science? but the MOST IMPORTANT SCIENCE?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak is the SCIENCE we use to determine if something is

GOOD OR BAD for our children. yeah, not intuitive, I know. When you SCIENCE people are so DEEP in detail, sometimes you can't see the BIG PICTURE. But, I can debate anyone on this point and come out on top.

@ScienceMagazine @scipak just take it on FAITH from ME, the guy who discovered this STRING MECHANISM which says that HALF the vaccines on earth? have a MAIN EFFECT of causing CLOTS in children. now, that CAN NOT BE GOOD for children, correct?

So? the LAST bastion of TRUE SCIENCE? will it be YOU?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak Or, will FUTURE GENERATIONS of scientists look back at this thread and wonder how the JOURNAL SCIENCE betrayed its MAIN MISSION? to figure out

WHAT IS GOOD AND WHAT IS BAD FOR OUR CHILDREN?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak The antibody in the blood of a patient from the 1st vaccine. what will it stick to more often?

1. its ANTIGEN put into the blood of the patient that has a lot of polyclonal ANTIBODIES from the 1st vaccine?

or

2. the viral antigen from a virus exposure?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak isn't is SO CLEAR that the antibody from the first vaccine is basically GUARANTEED to bind the antigen you put into the blood with the booster vaccine?

see? how the MAIN EFFECT of the vaccine and its booster is to create PRECIPITINS or CLOTS in the blood of children?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak which takes me back to the point of what the MAIN PURPOSE of SCIENCE is,

to figure out WHAT IS GOOD and WHAT IS BAD for our children. to keep humanity going. I'll never lose this debate on the main purpose of science. So SCIENCE, what are the options for you?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak Isn't it to PUBLISH this STRING MECHANISM so scientists all over the world can provide their input? so we can KNOW if the STRING MECHANISM is CORRECT when it says that the MAIN EFFECT of vaccines and their boosters is to cause CLOTS in the blood of children??????????

@ScienceMagazine @scipak Isn't science putting aside "authority" and looking at the issue from a "rational" perspective?

Isn't the STRING MECHANISM startling?

It ONLY uses the ANTIGEN as a starting point. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the vaccinologists to refute that, isn't it?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak Then, the STRING MECHANISM only uses their BEST SCIENCE, that an ANTIBODY will bind its ANTIGEN, even if it's in BLOOD.

EVERY vaccinologist on earth will CORROBORATE that point, correct? But, they somehow MISSED this HUGE FLAW?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak You put polyclonal antibodies into a beaker of saline.
You then ADD its antigen.

IT WILL CLUMP or what YOUR scientists call PRECIPITINS.

Add platelets and fibrin in the blood and now? it's a CLOT

@ScienceMagazine @scipak Now, it's TRUE that the MAIN PURPOSE of SCIENCE is to help us determine

WHAT IS GOOD and WHAT IS BAD for our children. Hard to argue with that.

So, this is the ULTIMATE TEST for the JOURNAL of SCIENCE. DO your editors use SCIENCE for THEMSELVES and their EGOS?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak or do your editors use SCIENCE for the BENEFIT of CHILDREN.

Because I bring the STRING MECHANISM which can't be REFUTED by TOP scientists and pediatricians all over the world. The ONLY conclusion? If NO SCIENTIST can show where the STRING MECHANISM is wrong? then?

@ScienceMagazine @scipak the ONLY rational next step? to LET THE WORLD KNOW and to STOP every vaccine that fits the STRING MECHANISM criteria (about half of all childhood vaccines, the COVID mRNA vaccine, and all future mRNA vaccines).

@ScienceMagazine @scipak This IS the biggest paradigm shift SCIENCE will EVER see (until the next one).

I will email all of the editors at SCIENCE. I will be back every day. I HOPE for SCIENCE and for children all over the world that your journal acts ethically and beyond reproach.