Vindicated Moderna Tipster Made Claims In Late 2020 That Vaccine Causes Next Gen Infertility

a reply to: puzzled2

I shelled out 10 cents on a PACER search for the court case identified at the top of the PDF that your website links to after clicking where the website says: "To view the lawsuit in full click→ here".

There is no such case registered with the court under the case number on that PDF document.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Now you know two.

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Now you know two.

You as well?


I know a few dozen people as well who had other serious side effects, such as aortic disection.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Getting what has been government statistics, to prove or disprove a point is getting very difficult. If they are instigating a depopulation agenda, how would one ever know? It is not something that they would want to advertise. When spontaneous abortions came out in the New England study, that's about an eighty-three percent abortion rate in the first two trimesters. This alone must have collapsed the live birth figures. This really is the big one.It seems to have been ignored and glossed over, as it would not even register in the average person's paradigm that this would be carried out as their government's policy. All we know which is reasonably reliable is the insurance companies having to pay out life insurance policies at a rate that should wipe them out. Even this has gone quiet. But I would be interested in the live birth figures, I bet they have collapsed.
This is the big secret that if became commonly known would blow everything away. At the moment it is being ignored and spun, but this alone has to be pivotal on the future of the human race.www.bitchute.com... an 800 percent increase in stillbirths has to be pivotal, the only reason that nothing will happen is that there will be more important things to worry about, like war prices of necessities, in fact, total effort in just trying to keep things going.

originally posted by: Smigg
To push an experimental drug no one needed the way they did means it has to contain something it shouldn't.

For a disease with likely a 99.5%+ survival rate before vaccination, and 99.9%+ for low risk groups, they pushed so hard with wall-to-wall fear mongering and frantic declarations that everyone had to get vaccinated. Their narrative did not match the data and risk level. Not only that, it didn't account for natural immunity. Nor did it account for the rushed, experimental nature of these vaccines.

They pushed it so hard and so desperately that it made me become very suspicious. There was some kind of agenda and ulterior motives.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: joejack1949

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: joejack1949
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Your posts are always good for a laugh. Already in the first two sentences you've made a flagrant mistake. Anyone else want to point it out?

Since you are clearly being a toxic individual, why don't you point it out instead of playing games?

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: joejack1949
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Your posts are always good for a laugh. Already in the first two sentences you've made a flagrant mistake. Anyone else want to point it out?

Since you are clearly being a toxic individual, why don't you point it out instead of playing games?

I can't be the only person who thinks critically about this stuff. I'll come back tomorrow when I have free time and see how things have progressed.

Adhering to the mainstream / big pharma narrative 100% of the time isn't the same as thinking critically.

This, so many people claiming to be skeptics and adopting intellectual airs of superiority, are at the same time acting as stenographers for the mainstream covid narratives.

If this is the depopulation agenda (as opposed to war), then im all for it.

We need less people on planet earth, we're incapable of being environmentally responsible with this many people.

originally posted by: CptGreenTea
If this is the depopulation agenda (as opposed to war), then im all for it.

We need less people on planet earth, we're incapable of being environmentally responsible with this many people.

You don't mind being depopulated?

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Yea why not?

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

My cousins dad actually had an aortic dissection around the vaccine push time frame. Can't say that's the cause off course but it makes you wonder. Surprisingly he lived...which he had about a 5% chance at.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

My cousins dad actually had an aortic dissection around the vaccine push time frame. Can't say that's the cause off course but it makes you wonder. Surprisingly he lived...which he had about a 5% chance at.

Glad he survived, but had you ever heard of an aortic dissection before then? I had never heard of it before 2021, but in the last year I've heard about it quite often.

originally posted by: Smigg
To push an experimental drug no one needed the way they did means it has to contain something it shouldn't.

In a nutshell, 100% factual

a reply to: v1rtu0s0
Yes until recently it got better but it's about time, about two months after the jab. I wrote it here and there whenever someone wrote things like it's not a thing or just coincidence.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Alright I'm back.

Your first sentence alleges that "specifically moderna" is reverse transcribing into DNA and your supporting evidence in the second sentence is about pfizer.

Thinking critically requires looking at claims, comparing it to evidence, and then making an evaluation. Your claim is unsupported by evidence.

Although given your lack of background in science, I commend your ability to copy/paste science terms to create a fake argument. I see why so many people are fooled by you.

originally posted by: joejack1949
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Alright I'm back.

Your first sentence alleges that "specifically moderna" is reverse transcribing into DNA and your supporting evidence in the second sentence is about pfizer.

Thinking critically requires looking at claims, comparing it to evidence, and then making an evaluation. Your claim is unsupported by evidence.

Although given your lack of background in science, I commend your ability to copy/paste science terms to create a fake argument. I see why so many people are fooled by you.

Right, it looks like pfizer and moderna are pretty similar in their effects.

He made a random comment about reverse transcription and LINE-1 in 2020, and we have a study showing an mRNA vaccine is doing just that, and accumulating in liver and reproductive organs, exactly as he predicted. Sounds like evidence to me.

You don't know my background in science. People might be "fooled" by me, but no one is fooled by you.

a reply to: joejack1949

lmao that's what your big reveal was? The fact that you don't understand the English language? He was clearly saying that the poster was alleging to be an engineer from moderna (if you read the post in the image provided). Moderna and pfizer both are using MRNA delivery mechanisms, therefore a pfizer study showing that the MRNA is being reverse transcribed into dna is very likely applicable to the moderna vaccine as the original 4chan poster had claimed.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

It's mandatory where I work, everyone is still getting pregnant.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

It's mandatory where I work, everyone is still getting pregnant.

The gene edit doesn't affect pregnancy now, it would effect the next generations ability to be fertile. Hence "next gen."

originally posted by: Matt11

originally posted by: Smigg
To push an experimental drug no one needed the way they did means it has to contain something it shouldn't.

In a nutshell, 100% factual

I have to wave my flag here as well... there was absolutely something strange about their reactions and actions to the whole thing.
It was like they were constantly trying to frame their words in a way that sounded objective but just wasn't.

And here in Denmark, the fact alone that we had to litterally fight them to disclose specific numbers.
If you have your house in order, you will not have any problem supplying the public with what ever numbers there are.

The only time a need for holding back data like that, is when you want to be the one to determin how it is interpreted. But here's the thing... you can't interpret hard data. It is what it is.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

It's mandatory where I work, everyone is still getting pregnant.

The gene edit doesn't affect pregnancy now, it would effect the next generations ability to be fertile. Hence "next gen."

Haha moving the goalposts from the original claims of infertility, clever to move them to something which can't be proven so they can't easily be proven wrong like the original infertility claims.