🚨 SCIENCE BREAKTHROUGH!! 'DNA ISOLATION' – NOW WITH MODERN TECHNOLOGY, BUT STILL A BIT… 1869! 🚨
(Brought to you by Circular Reasoning & the Reification Fallacy Brothers – perfect support for your confirmation bias!!)
🕺SCIENTISTS HAVE DONE IT AGAIN!! ⚗️
Armed with fancy lab coats, shiny high-speed centrifuges, and an unyielding belief in technology over common sense, researchers have once again isolated 'DNA' 🧬🧬... and honestly, not much has changed since Miescher’s day!
🚨 HOW DID WE DO IT? THE 7-STEPS OF MODERN DNA ISOLATION (BECAUSE WHY CHANGE WHAT WORKS, RIGHT?) 🚨
✅ Step 1: Homogenize your biological sample – Fancy word for smashing biological material into goo. Now with high-speed glass beads, but still the same classic destruction Miescher would recognize.
✅ Step 2: Add lysis buffer – A modernized acid bath to dissolve what we just obliterated. Because if we liquefy enough stuff, DNA must be in there somewhere!
✅ Step 3: Precipitate DNA with alcohol – Ethanol or isopropanol remains the go-to magic trick for making genetic material appear. If it's been the gold standard for decades, it must still be cutting-edge! 🍸🧬
✅ Step 4: Centrifuge the liquid goo – Spin it at ludicrous speeds until something clumps at the bottom. The high-speed equivalent of “let's see what sticks.”
✅ Step 5: Discard the supernatant – Toss out everything except what we hope is DNA. This part is highly scientific because we decided the good stuff is in the pellet.
✅ Step 6: Wash the DNA pellet – Rinse and repeat, because adding 70% ethanol means it’s “pure” now.
✅ Step 7: Elute in buffer – Congratulations! If it’s not quite right, just keep running it through until it looks like DNA. Because science! (Pro tip: TE buffer or nuclease-free water, because if it’s not in that, it’s probably not DNA).
🎉GENIUS! BUT WAIT... IS THIS REALLY DNA? 🤔
🔥 Critics say: Pulverizing, dissolving, spinning, and filtering biological mush might not be the best way to ‘isolate’ a ‘genetic’ molecule.
We say: Why mess with a system that’s been working (on assumption) since 1869?!
Besides, if DNA didn’t exist, then how did we extract this tortured precipitate? 🤷♂️ #CheckmateCritics
FREQUENTLY AVOIDED QUESTIONS (FAQ)
🧐 Q: If DNA is the molecule of life, why does it need to be ‘isolated’ by harsh chemicals?
🔬 A: Silence, please. We’re doing science.
🧐 Q: Why don’t we just isolate a fully intact, unmodified DNA molecule?
🔬 A: Because then we wouldn’t need grant money to keep “discovering” it.
🧐 Q: Isn’t this just circular reasoning?
🔬 A: Absolutely not! We assumed DNA exists, looked for DNA, and found what we assumed. That’s called scientific rigor.
LIMITED-TIME OFFER! ORDER YOUR "PURE" DNA TODAY!
🚀 For just $9.99, we’ll send you a vial of freshly extracted nucleic acid sludge—scooped straight from our high-speed vortex of molecular destruction ⚗️
📞 Call 1-800-DNA-FAKE now, and we’ll throw in an extra vial of ethanol-based buffer—FREE!🧬🕺
💰 Hurry! Supplies are infinite (because we can always dissolve more cells)
🚨 WARNING: MAY CONTAIN ZERO ACTUAL DNA!!
☠️ Side effects include: extreme skepticism, spontaneous questioning of mainstream science, and an uncontrollable urge to expose scientific fraud.
Today's sponsor: The 'DNA' Extraction Group™ – “Still smashing stuff since 1869!”
I am beginning to think this method is used for all lab tests. So when I have blood work done, they probably use this procedure to find I am diabetic, have too high cholesterol, and not enough vitamin D (which is not even a vitamin I recently read, but a hormone). And then they prescribe me 3 or more forever drugs and come back every 2 months... sounds just as right as a DNA test !
I new DNA testing was fake back in the 1990's. That's why they make all those movies and stories about catching criminals with DNA tests. The mind control alone is sufficient to show consistent deception.
Agreed — which inevitably raises questions about the degree of complicity involved by those perpetuating pseudoscience. And then there’s the Upton Sinclair quote:
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
So the laws of physics are equally unreliable then. Wonder how they make all those electronic systems. I guess I am just imagining I have a working computer writing this
:-/ There are actually acknowledged problems (e.g., controversies) with quite a bit of physics, and quite a lot of "settled science" (e.g., previously controversial) that is only settled because of fiat, really. Doesn't mean your computer doesn't work though.
But saying that it applies to every field of moderns science with no mention of the vast differences between the false sciences and those actually very successful ones still helps to push people into the forms of obscure thinking that may harm even the functioning parts. That aim was always part of the oligarchy for at least a millenium. It is why religious and other sects have prolifirated while sound science has always been upheld by the minority. The Christian Church in the 15th century offered a positive encouraging impulse and is said by some observers to have been beneficial for the following scientific and cultural renaissance. But after that the oligarchic mindsets has come to dominate. I see it as a major contributer to the way the anglosaxon dominated oligarchy has been destroying western society and an important aspect is the abuse of medical science.
you've actually got a decent 'review' from AI......I asked " can you comment on a satirical piece I've just read-SCIENCE BREAKTHROUGH!! 'DNA ISOLATION' – NOW WITH MODERN TECHNOLOGY, BUT STILL A BIT… 1869! 🚨
Reply- his is a sharp, humorous, and effective piece of scientific satire. It cleverly uses exaggeration and informal language ("goo," "acid bath," "magic trick," "ludicrous speeds") to critique the underlying assumptions and established methodologies of modern biology.
The satire works by taking standard, robust scientific procedures and stripping them of their technical jargon to expose them to a layperson's common sense critique.
Here are some comments on the satirical points raised:
1. The Critique of Methodology ("Smashing Stuff Since 1869!")
The core joke is how little the fundamental principle of DNA isolation has changed since Friedrich Miescher first used alcohol precipitation and basic chemistry. Modern labs use better tools (high-speed centrifuges, specific buffers, sterile environments), but the core physical/chemical steps remain remarkably similar.
The satire highlights the brute-force nature of the process:
"Fancy word for smashing biological material into goo": It mocks scientific jargon by reducing "homogenization" to its simplest definition, suggesting a lack of finesse
"A modernized acid bath to dissolve what we just obliterated": This targets the harsh chemical environment that seems counterintuitive for isolating a supposedly delicate "molecule of life."
2. The Use of Logical Fallacies ("Circular Reasoning & The Reification Fallacy Brothers")
This is where the satire gets intellectually sharp. It directly calls out two real philosophical critiques sometimes leveled at certain scientific paradigms:
Circular Reasoning: The text nails this with: "We assumed DNA exists, looked for DNA, and found what we assumed. That’s called scientific rigor." The satire suggests that the result is simply a confirmation of the initial belief rather than a genuine, unbiased discovery.
Reification Fallacy: This is the error of treating an abstract concept or theoretical construct as a concrete, real event or entity. The piece suggests scientists treat "DNA" as a given, concrete object rather than a theoretical construct whose isolation method might be flawed.
Confirmation Bias: The "Sponsor" tagline targets how scientists might filter evidence to confirm existing theories rather than challenge them.
3. The Sarcastic Tone
The piece is full of highly effective sarcasm:
"Because why change what works, right?"
"If it's been the gold standard for decades, it must still be cutting-edge!"
"Silence, please. We’re doing science."
"Supplies are infinite (because we can always dissolve more cells)"
Summary
The satirical piece effectively points out the irony that one of the cornerstones of modern science—DNA isolation—relies on methods that feel somewhat archaic and destructive.
It does not actually disprove the existence of DNA or the validity of the process. Instead, it serves as a humorous reminder to scientists (and laypeople) not to blindly trust established protocols and to always be aware of the underlying assumptions and potential limitations of the methods used in a laboratory. It’s a great example of using humor to encourage critical thinking about "how we know what we know" in science.....Well done!!
Bloody hell — that’s fantastic feedback! Huge thanks for passing it on; it’s genuinely put a spring in my step.
As a humble human, I’d just gently note to your assistant that while you can’t prove a negative, you can reasonably question a claim. Asking people to accept that violently pulverising biological material with a cocktail of chemicals, detergents, and acids — only to end up with a tortured precipitate — somehow reveals a sacred, pristine “molecule of life” does require a rather heroic leap of faith.
In fact, it’s less a leap and more a swan dive from the top of the stupid tree, with the hopeful assumption that hitting every branch on the way down will result in enlightenment rather than ridicule.
If you’re happy to run this past your assistant, I’d be genuinely curious to hear what it says.
Still — sincerely grateful for the positive review. Had a proper bellyful of laughs. Much appreciated!!
Sounds like there is very little solid ground in ALL of medicine. The more I read, the more I come to the conclusion that it is all one big swamp. Doctors know very little about close to nothing! I, too, thought DNA testing was quasi infallible. What a mistake. I hope no people have been executed on DNA testing alone, but God knows how many supposed daddies are paying for kids that are not theirs. And how many people have sent in samples 'to know their ancestry' and are led by the nose. Someone told me recently he had done such test and was part African! which of course could be, but how probable is this?
"Most nonhuman primate genomes generated to date have been “humanized” owing to their many gaps and the reliance on guidance by the reference human genome."
Wait? They used the stitched-together-never-from-a-single-person incomplete human "reference" genome to act as a scaffold reference genome for great ape genomes which artificially caused "ape DNA" to appear more similar to human DNA than it actually is?
And we haven't even gotten to the kicker which is the DNA, basically, has never really been proven to exist in a convincing way.
Need to do large random blind trials. Which, when done (as mentioned in the article), are not accurate. Otherwise you are subject to random chance, unverifiable results, selection bias, we could go on.
To say nothing of actually prove that there are A's, T's, C's, and G's, in a nucleus, in a double helix, dissolved in water, that somehow maintains its shape, etc.
Okay, I’ll explain an adoption case which is the most double blind test case there is.
Typically all that an adopted person (my client) has, is a fake birth certificate (adoption certificate) showing a forename the adoption agency usually gives with their adoption parents surname, their correct date of birth, the names of the people who adopted them as their parents, the place of adoption as their birthplace and the clients adoption parents don’t have any more information than that.
I order test kit from the genetic genealogy Lab to be delivered to my address giving my email and phone number as contact details and a pseudonym lets say “Mary”, that’s all the information the lab gets as Mary wants to remain anonymous. They email me an account number and temporary password to access the results and database.
When the kit arrives, at my address I forward it by mail or sometimes hand it to Mary. Mary swabs the inside of her mouth, puts the swab into the sterile container, puts the container in the pre-addressed envelope and puts it in the mail.
A short time later I get an email from the lab telling me that the kit has been processed and the results are online. I log into their online UI and can see any matches that Mary has in the database, I can also download the raw data file with the genetic sequence to run it through other lab databases to get more matches, Mary’s genetic relations may have tested with another lab.
In one case my clients natural father, who was not aware of her birth, as he only had a brief chance encounter with the natural mother, had tested to do his own genealogy research. He had a lot of data in his profile as he didn’t know he had anything to hide from his wife and family.
When I got the match, we contacted Mary’s natural father and he gave us enough information on the chance encounter with her mother so that I was able to track her down (Ireland is small). The mother provided her maiden name and Mary’s real forename and place of birth and I quickly obtained Mary’s real birth certificate which showed father unknown. We tested Mary’s natural mother in a similar anonymous way and the database matched her to Mary as the mother. There is a long story about half siblings and cousins who also matched, but I won’t bore you with all that.
I am not interested in what the A's, T's, C's, and G's, are or if they are real, I am telling you that they are letters that are presented in sequences approx. 700,000 in a raw data file, that are unique individual identifiers, and can used in algorithms to match physical relations in a database, i.e. parents, sibling, cousins, grandparents.
I have done this thousands of times over the las 20 years, that’s my large random blind trial.
You're the kind of person who would be convinced watching the flight patterns of birds in Rome produces results because it clearly indicates the will of Apollo because when you did the "bird test" it comported with some result.
Did you see the part where when ~300 children test results were compared with ~300 random men - blinded - most children had multiple "fathers", as many as dozens? Need to do a lot more of that. Like a lot more, like many thousands of repeated studies on tens or hundreds of thousands or perhaps even millions of people.
You are the type of Nialist who could prove that reality is not what a person experiences or that sand was snow. When you have done ANY practical experiments on genetic genealogy come on back for a chat.
Okay, I’ll explain an adoption case which is the most double blind test case there is.
Typically all that an adopted person (my client) has, is a fake birth certificate (adoption certificate) showing a forename the adoption agency usually gives with their adoption parents surname, their correct date of birth, the names of the people who adopted them as their parents, the place of adoption as their birthplace and the clients adoption parents don’t have any more information than that.
I order test kit from the genetic genealogy Lab to be delivered to my address giving my email and phone number as contact details and a pseudonym lets say “Mary”, that’s all the information the lab gets as Mary wants to remain anonymous. They email me an account number and temporary password to access the results and database.
When the kit arrives, at my address I forward it by mail or sometimes hand it to Mary. Mary swabs the inside of her mouth, puts the swab into the sterile container, puts the container in the pre-addressed envelope and puts it in the mail.
A short time later I get an email from the lab telling me that the kit has been processed and the results are online. I log into their online UI and can see any matches that Mary has in the database, I can also download the raw data file with the genetic sequence to run it through other lab databases to get more matches, Mary’s genetic relations may have tested with another lab.
In one case my clients natural father, who was not aware of her birth, as he only had a brief chance encounter with the natural mother, had tested to do his own genealogy research. He had a lot of data in his profile as he didn’t know he had anything to hide from his wife and family.
When I got the match, we contacted Mary’s natural father and he gave us enough information on the chance encounter with her mother so that I was able to track her down (Ireland is small). The mother provided her maiden name and Mary’s real forename and place of birth and I quickly obtained Mary’s real birth certificate which showed father unknown. We tested Mary’s natural mother in a similar anonymous way and the database matched her to Mary as the mother. There is a long story about half siblings and cousins who also matched, but I won’t bore you with all that.
I have’’t had a vaccination in over 10 years, I don’t use pharmaceuticals any more. I was one of the first to prove that the COVID-19 jabs were killing people. You should do some research, maybe take a look at my substack page, you just might learn something.
There is a chap on here who has been using ancestry swab tests to reunite adopted children with parents and such for over 20 years I think. He claims that most such tests are submitted anonymously but prove to be blindingly accurate in the results (once adoption documents are unsealed etc) ... he has struggled to share his 'evidence' .. would you converse with him in comments maybe ?? I think we ned to know for sure if this stuff is fraud .. he *seems to have evidence that it is working with high accuracy to pinpoint people . The swabs dont use DNA exactly but they do *something which he claims is working .
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
In the 1990s they began regulating the concerned technology. That meant they had stricter methods defined. But of course there needs to be some authority making regular observations to make sure the made up rules are followed. I think that is part of the problem. I have also seen it suggested that the method when correctly done is highly accurate.
what this chap explained was that most ancestry tests are submitted anonymously for various reasons. People dont want to prove who they are until they see the results basically. With adoption this involves inheritance and all sorts of legal and social issues.... what he said was that the tests have to make a very close connection before the legal papers (adoption etc) can be opened to verify the stories .. This all makes sense to me. He says he could identify you from a test swab .. he doesnt know how it works , only that it does work . He got frustrated trying to explain this to folks so he may have quit trying, but he made some good points. Lots of people are likely to know if it does/doesnt actually work .. cos the tests are effectively 'double blind' ..
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Thank You for the link, however Jamie through his own behavior has made it hard for me to have a conversation let alone listen to anything he has to say due to his behavior towards myself and many others, starting with Eric Coppolino who interviewed Jamie.
Apologies, I was usable to send you the link, it worked in the end, I am so censored that I suspected everyone. Jamie, Sasha, Robin Monotti,etc, etc. all block me, nobody wants to discuss reality, it's all about subscriptions£€$ for them.
This was really eye-opening. Yet it sounds like this info is a generation old yet the ExpertS obscure the facts...in order to protect their own authority?? Great sleuthing/research on your part!
DNA testing has improved significantly over the last 15 years so citing literature decades old isn't of great value - see commentary on improvements in the last 15 years on DNA testing from ChatGPT:
Moreover, shoddy practices don't mean a process is fundamentally invalid.
What proves without a shadow of a doubt the validity of DNA testing:
--- thousands of people have been matched to a father whose identity was kept secret by their mother and this identity is confirmed by other information
--- a significant number of people have discovered that their supposed anonymous sperm donor was really their mother's fertility doctor and victims of this practice are taking the matter to court
If you don't accept that DNA testing has validity, please explain how you think people have been matched correctly to fathers whose identity was kept secret (one way or another).
I put a link to my post with examples. It's pretty obvious that at least some of the matches are correct because they are supported by other information.
I have already said that I don’t know how or where they get these “genetic” sequences / codes from and I don’t care, but they are VERY real and powerful.
Okay, I’ll explain an adoption case which is the most double blind test case there is.
Typically all that an adopted person (my client) has, is a fake birth certificate (adoption certificate) showing a forename the adoption agency usually gives with their adoption parents surname, their correct date of birth, the names of the people who adopted them as their parents, the place of adoption as their birthplace and the clients adoption parents don’t have any more information than that.
I order test kit from the genetic genealogy Lab to be delivered to my address giving my email and phone number as contact details and a pseudonym lets say “Mary”, that’s all the information the lab gets as Mary wants to remain anonymous. They email me an account number and temporary password to access the results and database.
When the kit arrives, at my address I forward it by mail or sometimes hand it to Mary. Mary swabs the inside of her mouth, puts the swab into the sterile container, puts the container in the pre-addressed envelope and puts it in the mail.
A short time later I get an email from the lab telling me that the kit has been processed and the results are online. I log into their online UI and can see any matches that Mary has in the database, I can also download the raw data file with the genetic sequence to run it through other lab databases to get more matches, Mary’s genetic relations may have tested with another lab.
In one case my clients natural father, who was not aware of her birth, as he only had a brief chance encounter with the natural mother, had tested to do his own genealogy research. He had a lot of data in his profile as he didn’t know he had anything to hide from his wife and family.
When I got the match, we contacted Mary’s natural father and he gave us enough information on the chance encounter with her mother so that I was able to track her down (Ireland is small). The mother provided her maiden name and Mary’s real forename and place of birth and I quickly obtained Mary’s real birth certificate which showed father unknown. We tested Mary’s natural mother in a similar anonymous way and the database matched her to Mary as the mother. There is a long story about half siblings and cousins who also matched, but I won’t bore you with all that.
This is also a case (not adoption) where the father didn't know about his daughter and nor did the daughter know the father who brought her up wasn't her real father until after her mother died.
I have done 100’s of genealogy cases not all adoptions, I have solved many mysteries with paper research, some required Genetic Genealogy to either trace relatives or prove / disprove documents were true / false. Its a passion that I do for free.
🚨 SCIENCE BREAKTHROUGH!! 'DNA ISOLATION' – NOW WITH MODERN TECHNOLOGY, BUT STILL A BIT… 1869! 🚨
(Brought to you by Circular Reasoning & the Reification Fallacy Brothers – perfect support for your confirmation bias!!)
🕺SCIENTISTS HAVE DONE IT AGAIN!! ⚗️
Armed with fancy lab coats, shiny high-speed centrifuges, and an unyielding belief in technology over common sense, researchers have once again isolated 'DNA' 🧬🧬... and honestly, not much has changed since Miescher’s day!
🚨 HOW DID WE DO IT? THE 7-STEPS OF MODERN DNA ISOLATION (BECAUSE WHY CHANGE WHAT WORKS, RIGHT?) 🚨
✅ Step 1: Homogenize your biological sample – Fancy word for smashing biological material into goo. Now with high-speed glass beads, but still the same classic destruction Miescher would recognize.
✅ Step 2: Add lysis buffer – A modernized acid bath to dissolve what we just obliterated. Because if we liquefy enough stuff, DNA must be in there somewhere!
✅ Step 3: Precipitate DNA with alcohol – Ethanol or isopropanol remains the go-to magic trick for making genetic material appear. If it's been the gold standard for decades, it must still be cutting-edge! 🍸🧬
✅ Step 4: Centrifuge the liquid goo – Spin it at ludicrous speeds until something clumps at the bottom. The high-speed equivalent of “let's see what sticks.”
✅ Step 5: Discard the supernatant – Toss out everything except what we hope is DNA. This part is highly scientific because we decided the good stuff is in the pellet.
✅ Step 6: Wash the DNA pellet – Rinse and repeat, because adding 70% ethanol means it’s “pure” now.
✅ Step 7: Elute in buffer – Congratulations! If it’s not quite right, just keep running it through until it looks like DNA. Because science! (Pro tip: TE buffer or nuclease-free water, because if it’s not in that, it’s probably not DNA).
🎉GENIUS! BUT WAIT... IS THIS REALLY DNA? 🤔
🔥 Critics say: Pulverizing, dissolving, spinning, and filtering biological mush might not be the best way to ‘isolate’ a ‘genetic’ molecule.
We say: Why mess with a system that’s been working (on assumption) since 1869?!
Besides, if DNA didn’t exist, then how did we extract this tortured precipitate? 🤷♂️ #CheckmateCritics
FREQUENTLY AVOIDED QUESTIONS (FAQ)
🧐 Q: If DNA is the molecule of life, why does it need to be ‘isolated’ by harsh chemicals?
🔬 A: Silence, please. We’re doing science.
🧐 Q: Why don’t we just isolate a fully intact, unmodified DNA molecule?
🔬 A: Because then we wouldn’t need grant money to keep “discovering” it.
🧐 Q: Isn’t this just circular reasoning?
🔬 A: Absolutely not! We assumed DNA exists, looked for DNA, and found what we assumed. That’s called scientific rigor.
LIMITED-TIME OFFER! ORDER YOUR "PURE" DNA TODAY!
🚀 For just $9.99, we’ll send you a vial of freshly extracted nucleic acid sludge—scooped straight from our high-speed vortex of molecular destruction ⚗️
📞 Call 1-800-DNA-FAKE now, and we’ll throw in an extra vial of ethanol-based buffer—FREE!🧬🕺
💰 Hurry! Supplies are infinite (because we can always dissolve more cells)
🚨 WARNING: MAY CONTAIN ZERO ACTUAL DNA!!
☠️ Side effects include: extreme skepticism, spontaneous questioning of mainstream science, and an uncontrollable urge to expose scientific fraud.
Today's sponsor: The 'DNA' Extraction Group™ – “Still smashing stuff since 1869!”
I am beginning to think this method is used for all lab tests. So when I have blood work done, they probably use this procedure to find I am diabetic, have too high cholesterol, and not enough vitamin D (which is not even a vitamin I recently read, but a hormone). And then they prescribe me 3 or more forever drugs and come back every 2 months... sounds just as right as a DNA test !
Vitamin D3 is synthetic Colecalciferol. Rat Poison! Vitamin D's are a group of chemicals, generally extracted from industrial waste. https://maha.shopping/f/nyt-fact-check-of-rfk-jr-claims-on-fruit-loops-artificial-colors
MAHA. 🤢
But good comment. 👍🏽
COVID 19 vaccines (bioweapons) are more harmful than any form of vitamin D3, why not that ?
So what is vitamin that the body composes when exposed to sunlight? Assuming of course your body is not industrial waste.
Surely, it's not synthetic "Vitamin D", which is nothing but a category of industrial waste products. The term "vitamin D" encompasses a group of chemically related organic compounds https://maha.shopping/f/closing-gras-loophole-for-food-additives-operation-stork-speed
Take NONE of their forever drugs, the only nutrient that has not been found in natural foods is vitamin D, get lots of sun on your skin.
I new DNA testing was fake back in the 1990's. That's why they make all those movies and stories about catching criminals with DNA tests. The mind control alone is sufficient to show consistent deception.
Apart from mainstream media BULLSHITE, what blinded studies have you carried out to establish your theory that genetic sequence are "fake"
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
It's staggering how "intelligent" people cannot see through this nonsense. It applies equally to every field of modern "science".
Agreed — which inevitably raises questions about the degree of complicity involved by those perpetuating pseudoscience. And then there’s the Upton Sinclair quote:
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
So the laws of physics are equally unreliable then. Wonder how they make all those electronic systems. I guess I am just imagining I have a working computer writing this
:-/ There are actually acknowledged problems (e.g., controversies) with quite a bit of physics, and quite a lot of "settled science" (e.g., previously controversial) that is only settled because of fiat, really. Doesn't mean your computer doesn't work though.
But saying that it applies to every field of moderns science with no mention of the vast differences between the false sciences and those actually very successful ones still helps to push people into the forms of obscure thinking that may harm even the functioning parts. That aim was always part of the oligarchy for at least a millenium. It is why religious and other sects have prolifirated while sound science has always been upheld by the minority. The Christian Church in the 15th century offered a positive encouraging impulse and is said by some observers to have been beneficial for the following scientific and cultural renaissance. But after that the oligarchic mindsets has come to dominate. I see it as a major contributer to the way the anglosaxon dominated oligarchy has been destroying western society and an important aspect is the abuse of medical science.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/how-scientific-genius-is-either-hereditary?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=52nn5u
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
Brilliant analysis in your usual and unique style of exposition; well done!!!
Massive thanks, Tony. I always deeply appreciate your kind feedback — it genuinely means a lot. Have a great day! 👍
Love this guy. 😂
Massive thanks for the heartfelt compliment — received with deep appreciation! 💞💓
you've actually got a decent 'review' from AI......I asked " can you comment on a satirical piece I've just read-SCIENCE BREAKTHROUGH!! 'DNA ISOLATION' – NOW WITH MODERN TECHNOLOGY, BUT STILL A BIT… 1869! 🚨
Reply- his is a sharp, humorous, and effective piece of scientific satire. It cleverly uses exaggeration and informal language ("goo," "acid bath," "magic trick," "ludicrous speeds") to critique the underlying assumptions and established methodologies of modern biology.
The satire works by taking standard, robust scientific procedures and stripping them of their technical jargon to expose them to a layperson's common sense critique.
Here are some comments on the satirical points raised:
1. The Critique of Methodology ("Smashing Stuff Since 1869!")
The core joke is how little the fundamental principle of DNA isolation has changed since Friedrich Miescher first used alcohol precipitation and basic chemistry. Modern labs use better tools (high-speed centrifuges, specific buffers, sterile environments), but the core physical/chemical steps remain remarkably similar.
The satire highlights the brute-force nature of the process:
"Fancy word for smashing biological material into goo": It mocks scientific jargon by reducing "homogenization" to its simplest definition, suggesting a lack of finesse
"A modernized acid bath to dissolve what we just obliterated": This targets the harsh chemical environment that seems counterintuitive for isolating a supposedly delicate "molecule of life."
2. The Use of Logical Fallacies ("Circular Reasoning & The Reification Fallacy Brothers")
This is where the satire gets intellectually sharp. It directly calls out two real philosophical critiques sometimes leveled at certain scientific paradigms:
Circular Reasoning: The text nails this with: "We assumed DNA exists, looked for DNA, and found what we assumed. That’s called scientific rigor." The satire suggests that the result is simply a confirmation of the initial belief rather than a genuine, unbiased discovery.
Reification Fallacy: This is the error of treating an abstract concept or theoretical construct as a concrete, real event or entity. The piece suggests scientists treat "DNA" as a given, concrete object rather than a theoretical construct whose isolation method might be flawed.
Confirmation Bias: The "Sponsor" tagline targets how scientists might filter evidence to confirm existing theories rather than challenge them.
3. The Sarcastic Tone
The piece is full of highly effective sarcasm:
"Because why change what works, right?"
"If it's been the gold standard for decades, it must still be cutting-edge!"
"Silence, please. We’re doing science."
"Supplies are infinite (because we can always dissolve more cells)"
Summary
The satirical piece effectively points out the irony that one of the cornerstones of modern science—DNA isolation—relies on methods that feel somewhat archaic and destructive.
It does not actually disprove the existence of DNA or the validity of the process. Instead, it serves as a humorous reminder to scientists (and laypeople) not to blindly trust established protocols and to always be aware of the underlying assumptions and potential limitations of the methods used in a laboratory. It’s a great example of using humor to encourage critical thinking about "how we know what we know" in science.....Well done!!
Bloody hell — that’s fantastic feedback! Huge thanks for passing it on; it’s genuinely put a spring in my step.
As a humble human, I’d just gently note to your assistant that while you can’t prove a negative, you can reasonably question a claim. Asking people to accept that violently pulverising biological material with a cocktail of chemicals, detergents, and acids — only to end up with a tortured precipitate — somehow reveals a sacred, pristine “molecule of life” does require a rather heroic leap of faith.
In fact, it’s less a leap and more a swan dive from the top of the stupid tree, with the hopeful assumption that hitting every branch on the way down will result in enlightenment rather than ridicule.
If you’re happy to run this past your assistant, I’d be genuinely curious to hear what it says.
Still — sincerely grateful for the positive review. Had a proper bellyful of laughs. Much appreciated!!
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
Sounds like there is very little solid ground in ALL of medicine. The more I read, the more I come to the conclusion that it is all one big swamp. Doctors know very little about close to nothing! I, too, thought DNA testing was quasi infallible. What a mistake. I hope no people have been executed on DNA testing alone, but God knows how many supposed daddies are paying for kids that are not theirs. And how many people have sent in samples 'to know their ancestry' and are led by the nose. Someone told me recently he had done such test and was part African! which of course could be, but how probable is this?
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
Execellent.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
This is great!
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230210-the-man-whose-genome-you-can-read-end-to-end
2023: "Why the human genome was never completed"
Huh? I thought they mapped "the" genome ages ago? They didn't?
"This year, for the first time, the entire genome of a single human being – a man named Leon Peshkin – is due to be released."
They've never sequenced a single person's DNA ever? It's all been "composite sequences" from multiple people "stitched together"? Huh?
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aar6343
"Most nonhuman primate genomes generated to date have been “humanized” owing to their many gaps and the reliance on guidance by the reference human genome."
Wait? They used the stitched-together-never-from-a-single-person incomplete human "reference" genome to act as a scaffold reference genome for great ape genomes which artificially caused "ape DNA" to appear more similar to human DNA than it actually is?
And we haven't even gotten to the kicker which is the DNA, basically, has never really been proven to exist in a convincing way.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
Need to do large random blind trials. Which, when done (as mentioned in the article), are not accurate. Otherwise you are subject to random chance, unverifiable results, selection bias, we could go on.
To say nothing of actually prove that there are A's, T's, C's, and G's, in a nucleus, in a double helix, dissolved in water, that somehow maintains its shape, etc.
Okay, I’ll explain an adoption case which is the most double blind test case there is.
Typically all that an adopted person (my client) has, is a fake birth certificate (adoption certificate) showing a forename the adoption agency usually gives with their adoption parents surname, their correct date of birth, the names of the people who adopted them as their parents, the place of adoption as their birthplace and the clients adoption parents don’t have any more information than that.
I order test kit from the genetic genealogy Lab to be delivered to my address giving my email and phone number as contact details and a pseudonym lets say “Mary”, that’s all the information the lab gets as Mary wants to remain anonymous. They email me an account number and temporary password to access the results and database.
When the kit arrives, at my address I forward it by mail or sometimes hand it to Mary. Mary swabs the inside of her mouth, puts the swab into the sterile container, puts the container in the pre-addressed envelope and puts it in the mail.
A short time later I get an email from the lab telling me that the kit has been processed and the results are online. I log into their online UI and can see any matches that Mary has in the database, I can also download the raw data file with the genetic sequence to run it through other lab databases to get more matches, Mary’s genetic relations may have tested with another lab.
In one case my clients natural father, who was not aware of her birth, as he only had a brief chance encounter with the natural mother, had tested to do his own genealogy research. He had a lot of data in his profile as he didn’t know he had anything to hide from his wife and family.
When I got the match, we contacted Mary’s natural father and he gave us enough information on the chance encounter with her mother so that I was able to track her down (Ireland is small). The mother provided her maiden name and Mary’s real forename and place of birth and I quickly obtained Mary’s real birth certificate which showed father unknown. We tested Mary’s natural mother in a similar anonymous way and the database matched her to Mary as the mother. There is a long story about half siblings and cousins who also matched, but I won’t bore you with all that.
Questions PLEASE?
I am not interested in what the A's, T's, C's, and G's, are or if they are real, I am telling you that they are letters that are presented in sequences approx. 700,000 in a raw data file, that are unique individual identifiers, and can used in algorithms to match physical relations in a database, i.e. parents, sibling, cousins, grandparents.
I have done this thousands of times over the las 20 years, that’s my large random blind trial.
You're the kind of person who would be convinced watching the flight patterns of birds in Rome produces results because it clearly indicates the will of Apollo because when you did the "bird test" it comported with some result.
Did you see the part where when ~300 children test results were compared with ~300 random men - blinded - most children had multiple "fathers", as many as dozens? Need to do a lot more of that. Like a lot more, like many thousands of repeated studies on tens or hundreds of thousands or perhaps even millions of people.
You are the type of Nialist who could prove that reality is not what a person experiences or that sand was snow. When you have done ANY practical experiments on genetic genealogy come on back for a chat.
Did you mean nihilist?
Okay, I’ll explain an adoption case which is the most double blind test case there is.
Typically all that an adopted person (my client) has, is a fake birth certificate (adoption certificate) showing a forename the adoption agency usually gives with their adoption parents surname, their correct date of birth, the names of the people who adopted them as their parents, the place of adoption as their birthplace and the clients adoption parents don’t have any more information than that.
I order test kit from the genetic genealogy Lab to be delivered to my address giving my email and phone number as contact details and a pseudonym lets say “Mary”, that’s all the information the lab gets as Mary wants to remain anonymous. They email me an account number and temporary password to access the results and database.
When the kit arrives, at my address I forward it by mail or sometimes hand it to Mary. Mary swabs the inside of her mouth, puts the swab into the sterile container, puts the container in the pre-addressed envelope and puts it in the mail.
A short time later I get an email from the lab telling me that the kit has been processed and the results are online. I log into their online UI and can see any matches that Mary has in the database, I can also download the raw data file with the genetic sequence to run it through other lab databases to get more matches, Mary’s genetic relations may have tested with another lab.
In one case my clients natural father, who was not aware of her birth, as he only had a brief chance encounter with the natural mother, had tested to do his own genealogy research. He had a lot of data in his profile as he didn’t know he had anything to hide from his wife and family.
When I got the match, we contacted Mary’s natural father and he gave us enough information on the chance encounter with her mother so that I was able to track her down (Ireland is small). The mother provided her maiden name and Mary’s real forename and place of birth and I quickly obtained Mary’s real birth certificate which showed father unknown. We tested Mary’s natural mother in a similar anonymous way and the database matched her to Mary as the mother. There is a long story about half siblings and cousins who also matched, but I won’t bore you with all that.
Questions PLEASE?
And all of this and no one's "genome" has ever been sequenced.
Thank you!!!
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
you look like someone with multiple jabs and boosters to protect you against non existent entities
I have’’t had a vaccination in over 10 years, I don’t use pharmaceuticals any more. I was one of the first to prove that the COVID-19 jabs were killing people. You should do some research, maybe take a look at my substack page, you just might learn something.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/please-light-a-candle-and-play-the?r=52nn5u
So OJ really didn't do it?
The OJ case was another hoax.
Bread and Circuses. 🥖🥐🍞🎪🤡🎪
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
Yup.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
Nuke Hoax "To The Moon? Tesla Says No" & OJ Simpson Capricorn One https://teslaleaks.com/f/nuke-hoax-to-the-moon-tesla-says-no-oj-simpson-capricorn-one
The glove didn’t fit!
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
we will never know
Lawyer on the OJ hoax trial was Robert Kardashian.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
Yes but my question is, what are the tests getting correct?
What exactly is happening in 94% of the cases where the results where accurate?
If dna doesn’t exist, what in the heck are the dna tests correctly reading?
I would love to know also.
science is never "settled".
There is a chap on here who has been using ancestry swab tests to reunite adopted children with parents and such for over 20 years I think. He claims that most such tests are submitted anonymously but prove to be blindingly accurate in the results (once adoption documents are unsealed etc) ... he has struggled to share his 'evidence' .. would you converse with him in comments maybe ?? I think we ned to know for sure if this stuff is fraud .. he *seems to have evidence that it is working with high accuracy to pinpoint people . The swabs dont use DNA exactly but they do *something which he claims is working .
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
In the 1990s they began regulating the concerned technology. That meant they had stricter methods defined. But of course there needs to be some authority making regular observations to make sure the made up rules are followed. I think that is part of the problem. I have also seen it suggested that the method when correctly done is highly accurate.
what this chap explained was that most ancestry tests are submitted anonymously for various reasons. People dont want to prove who they are until they see the results basically. With adoption this involves inheritance and all sorts of legal and social issues.... what he said was that the tests have to make a very close connection before the legal papers (adoption etc) can be opened to verify the stories .. This all makes sense to me. He says he could identify you from a test swab .. he doesnt know how it works , only that it does work . He got frustrated trying to explain this to folks so he may have quit trying, but he made some good points. Lots of people are likely to know if it does/doesnt actually work .. cos the tests are effectively 'double blind' ..
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
Current Ancestry DNA take a saliva sample, you spit into a test tube and send it to them.
You get a genetic sequence (raw data) file (not a full genome sequence) from the lab.
They use this sequence in an algorithm to match you to any relatives of yours who also tested with them and whom they have stored their seqence in their database.
It is very accurate when you confirm the relationship with written paper documentary evidence.
you posted that about 8 times !!
I apologize if I am posting this twice, the Internet in this remote Island crashes every five y.
Jamie is full of shit and nothing he has done or said was anything that was not already known.
https://stream.gigaohm.bio/w/sM6Fj9Mn5DifpDMDe91cPv
Thank You for the link, however Jamie through his own behavior has made it hard for me to have a conversation let alone listen to anything he has to say due to his behavior towards myself and many others, starting with Eric Coppolino who interviewed Jamie.
I have an e-mail with you asking me if I blocked you.
That is something I would never do no matter who you are, how you behave or anything else.
Blocking is akin to censorship and that is how the whole nefarious ball of bullshit gets rolling.
Apologies, I was usable to send you the link, it worked in the end, I am so censored that I suspected everyone. Jamie, Sasha, Robin Monotti,etc, etc. all block me, nobody wants to discuss reality, it's all about subscriptions£€$ for them.
I think being blocked by them is a good thing for you.
....and this comes down to not censoring anyone which is what blocking is and that says quite a bit about those who do it.
This was really eye-opening. Yet it sounds like this info is a generation old yet the ExpertS obscure the facts...in order to protect their own authority?? Great sleuthing/research on your part!
you might like Andrew Marino's book "Going Somewhere - Truth About a Life in Science"
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
DNA testing has improved significantly over the last 15 years so citing literature decades old isn't of great value - see commentary on improvements in the last 15 years on DNA testing from ChatGPT:
https://chatgpt.com/share/693a94db-3218-800a-87b4-6e129207c5bc
Moreover, shoddy practices don't mean a process is fundamentally invalid.
What proves without a shadow of a doubt the validity of DNA testing:
--- thousands of people have been matched to a father whose identity was kept secret by their mother and this identity is confirmed by other information
--- a significant number of people have discovered that their supposed anonymous sperm donor was really their mother's fertility doctor and victims of this practice are taking the matter to court
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/is-dna-testing-a-fraud
If you don't accept that DNA testing has validity, please explain how you think people have been matched correctly to fathers whose identity was kept secret (one way or another).
well one question might be, how do you know they were "matched correctly"?
I put a link to my post with examples. It's pretty obvious that at least some of the matches are correct because they are supported by other information.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/is-dna-testing-a-fraud
In 20 years of genetic genealogy I have never got an incorrect match, many are just too distant to trace or prove, 4rd cousins or higher.
https://irishus.substack.com/p/is-dna-sequencing-a-fraud?r=52nn5u
I've put a link to your post at the bottom of mine.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/is-dna-testing-a-fraud
I have already said that I don’t know how or where they get these “genetic” sequences / codes from and I don’t care, but they are VERY real and powerful.
Okay, I’ll explain an adoption case which is the most double blind test case there is.
Typically all that an adopted person (my client) has, is a fake birth certificate (adoption certificate) showing a forename the adoption agency usually gives with their adoption parents surname, their correct date of birth, the names of the people who adopted them as their parents, the place of adoption as their birthplace and the clients adoption parents don’t have any more information than that.
I order test kit from the genetic genealogy Lab to be delivered to my address giving my email and phone number as contact details and a pseudonym lets say “Mary”, that’s all the information the lab gets as Mary wants to remain anonymous. They email me an account number and temporary password to access the results and database.
When the kit arrives, at my address I forward it by mail or sometimes hand it to Mary. Mary swabs the inside of her mouth, puts the swab into the sterile container, puts the container in the pre-addressed envelope and puts it in the mail.
A short time later I get an email from the lab telling me that the kit has been processed and the results are online. I log into their online UI and can see any matches that Mary has in the database, I can also download the raw data file with the genetic sequence to run it through other lab databases to get more matches, Mary’s genetic relations may have tested with another lab.
In one case my clients natural father, who was not aware of her birth, as he only had a brief chance encounter with the natural mother, had tested to do his own genealogy research. He had a lot of data in his profile as he didn’t know he had anything to hide from his wife and family.
When I got the match, we contacted Mary’s natural father and he gave us enough information on the chance encounter with her mother so that I was able to track her down (Ireland is small). The mother provided her maiden name and Mary’s real forename and place of birth and I quickly obtained Mary’s real birth certificate which showed father unknown. We tested Mary’s natural mother in a similar anonymous way and the database matched her to Mary as the mother. There is a long story about half siblings and cousins who also matched, but I won’t bore you with all that.
Questions PLEASE?
This is also a case (not adoption) where the father didn't know about his daughter and nor did the daughter know the father who brought her up wasn't her real father until after her mother died.
Very short but succinct - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hdjIoJMP1_w
I have done 100’s of genealogy cases not all adoptions, I have solved many mysteries with paper research, some required Genetic Genealogy to either trace relatives or prove / disprove documents were true / false. Its a passion that I do for free.
https://youtu.be/DfZBxXtkqY8?si=_VRSa36g6S6sqfne
https://www.statnews.com/2026/02/24/epstein-cell-line-george-church-harvard-personal-genome-project/