Graphene, The Mirror Surface of the Infowar

— Piers Corbyn falls foul of sting operation by toff YouTubers Pieters and Manners.

—No-V seizes on Graphene Oxide, MSM counters.

— Charles Eisenstein publishes another excellent essay, this time on Substack.

Along with diamond and graphite, graphene is an allotrope — an atomic structural cousin — of carbon, the atom on which all life (as we know it, Jim) on Earth is based.

While materials scientists have been interested in graphite since the mid 1800s, the name Graphene was coined by German chemist Hans-Peter Boehm in the 60s, referring to a then theoretical structure composed of a single layer of carbon atoms. We could argue that such a structure is essentially theoretical, as it can only be ‘seen’ via an electron scanning microscope, which invites all sorts of quantum-theoretical experiment/ observer considerations. We will come back to that.

Graphene is interesting at the subatomic level:

Each atom in a graphene sheet is connected to its three nearest neighbors by a σ-bond, and contributes one electron to a conduction band that extends over the whole sheet. [Wikipedia]

And:

These conduction bands make graphene a semimetal with unusual electronic properties that are best described by theories for massless relativistic particles.

What the hell is a massless particle, you may well ask?

In particle physics, a massless particle is an elementary particle whose invariant mass is zero. The two known massless particles are both gauge bosons: the photon and the gluon. However, gluons are never observed as free particles, since they are confined within hadrons. [Wikipedia]

As you can see, we are entering a cascade of terms defined via other terms. We will go one step further, as you may heard of hadrons in relation to the hadron collider at CERN.

In particle physics, a hadron is a subatomic composite particle made of two or more quarks held together by the strong interaction in a similar way as molecules are held together by electromagnetism.

Let’s wrap up our brief descent into subatomic physics with the lay, and probably glib, statement that we have arrived at the edge of the wave/ particle divide, where weird relativistic and quantum stuff happens, like particles being in more than one place at the same time.

What does this mean for graphene? What are these weird electronic properties? Basically it is a semimetal superconductor, with subatomic lattice properties that bode well for spintronics, which is the study, and proto-technology of the subatomic spin of electrons, which promises to open up an new degree of subatomic freedom in addition to electronic charge state. A new paradigm of quantum computing outside the body, and neuromorphic computing within it, awaits.

In short, graphene is the interface between organic and inorganic, between cellular and atomic lattice, natural and engineered.

Why am I talking about it?

If you read my previous piece At The Pandemic Looking Glass, you might remember the singular image I received in an ayahuasca ceremony, of a cyborg limb presented in a golden display case. It wasn’t something I had been reading or thinking about, or in any way related to personal process at the time. It joins a handful of other entirely impersonal visions Ayahuasca has shared with me over the years, and which feel like that mysterious intelligence sharing a thought with me. It looked something like the visualisation below, but if anything more organic, less metallic, like it had been grown in a vat, rather than assembled.

The novelist William Gibson, whose Hugo, Nebula and Philip K Award-winning Neuromancer trilogy is partly to blame for me aborting a certain future as a legendary artist and opting instead to study AI, extended his vision from the virtual (he coined the term cyberspace) to the physical, imagining for example nanotechnological substances that could be poured from a tube and would assemble themselves into guns or limbs or whatever. Submicroscopic devices could be inserted into the human bloodstream for beneficent or maleficent reasons. The protagonist of Neuromancer undertakes his quest in order to avoid annihilation via some sort of programmable poison.

Enter Piers Corbyn, ego-stroked and treated to a free pizza while YouTubers Josh Pieters and Archie Manners (±1.5M channel subscribers) entrap him into receiving a ten grand bung for laying off AstraZeneca in his anti-vaxx soapboxing.

Let’s put concerns about Pieters’, Manners’ or Corbyn’s integrity aside for a moment—we will come back to that—and pick up on something he mumbles about, while allegedly noting the good of the AstraZeneca vaccine over the mRNA products of Pfizer and Moderna, which contain ‘magnetics.’

This of course is a reference to graphene oxide, which has the neat, paradigm-launching acronym GO.

[The substance graphitic oxide] spontaneously disperses in basic solutions or can be dispersed by sonication in polar solvents to yield monomolecular sheets, known as graphene oxide by analogy to graphene, the single-layer form of graphite. [Wikipedia]

Sonication is the application of ultrasound waves to alter the subatomic structure of a substance. Why do that?

Initially, graphene oxide attracted substantial interest as a possible intermediate for the manufacture of graphene. The graphene obtained by reduction of graphene oxide still has many chemical and structural defects which is a problem for some applications but an advantage for some others.

And according to the cutting edge of the NoV movement, one of those other applications is biomedical.

Biomedicine is all lit up about graphene. Google Scholar returns more than 17000 citations in 2021 alone matching ‘biomedical applications graphene.’ This is hardly a meta-scientific enquiry but at least some back up to my claim that graphene is a thing in biomedicine.

A quick glance at the first page of those citations will suffice to convince you that, as I have said before, you are on the outside of a vast and highly rarefied priesthood, gawping uncomprehendingly at its sacred texts. They may as well be written in cuneiform.

While it is a published fact that GO nano-sheets are highly interesting when it comes to trapping viral forms, thus inviting enquiry into biomedical applications (see for example this recent paper), it is of course harder to ascertain whether the current cohort of mRNA vaccines contain GO.

V voices might agree and NoV voices (off the record, of course) that the new vaccines are an experiment, an ongoing clinical trial. The agreement would end there. For the V camp, the vaccines are a first mass foray into a new paradigm of vaccine technology, where the human immune system is primed not by inactive viral matter but programmed via computed genetic codes—delivered in the case of the mRNA Covid vaccines via a version of the spike protein found on the SarsCoV2 virus.

For the NoV camp, the antiviral experiment is a smokescreen. The real objective is the interface between nanotechnology and celllular biology.

The idea appears to have originated in an ‘informal’ study by Professor Pablo Campra Madrid at the University of Almería, aiming to compare electron microscope imaging of a sample of a Covid vaccine listed as “COMIRNATYTM. Sterile concentrate. COVID-19 mRNA. 6 doses after dilution.”

Comirnaty is the Pfizer mRNA vaccine (see here.)

According to the Almería report, [screenshots from report]:

The Almería report concludes [above] that there is high level of similarity between electron scanning microscope images of the Comirnaty sample and reference images of graphene in solution.

On the next page it admits a disclaimer.

Translation:

Important note: For a definitive IDENTIFICATION of GRAPHENE by TEM, it is necessary to complement the observation with structural characterization by obtaining by EDS of a Characteristic ELECTRON DIFFRACTION PATTERN (such as figure B shown below).The pattern corresponding to graphite or graphene has a hexagonal symmetry, and generally has several concentric hexagons.

It has not been possible at the moment obtain this pattern because of the shortage of sample available, and the chaotic arrangement and density of folds.

The report goes on, as far as I can tell, to present a number of visual comparisons between sample and reference, obtained using optical, rather than electron scanning microscopy.

The report was picked up on by José Luis Sevillano, a computer scientist at the University of Seville. I found a link (via Google!) to this channel on Bitchute, which seems to have been investigating graphene for some time, and includes several interviews with Sevillano. The channel operator looks to Sevillano for expert advice on whether graphene nanosheets could be used as 5G antenna. Sevillano, as far as I can tell, does not deny it.

Reuters reports that Pfizer denies the presence of graphene in Cominarty:

“Graphene oxide is not used in the manufacture of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine,” Pfizer’s Senior Associate of Global Media Relations told Reuters.

The Reuters article, like others by Forbes, Fullfact and others goes on to highlight the unknown origin of the Comirnaty sample, disclaimed in the report, and to screenshot a tweet by the University of Almeria cautioning that Campra’s report is informal, unofficial and therefore ‘false.’

https://twitter.com/ualmeria/status/1410884237377560579?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1410884237377560579%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Farticle%2Ffactcheck-grapheneoxide-vaccine-idUSL1N2OZ14F

Reuters concludes the Campra report is ‘False’ because:

Pfizer said their COVID-19 vaccines do not contain graphene oxide.

With any kind of journalistic, never mind skeptical 2021 infowarrior hat on, that is surely not good enough!

The Spanish fact checking website Maldita is more thorough in its dissection of the Campra report. It refutes the validity of both electron scanning and optical microscopy comparisons, as no control was used, and goes on to bring in a number of other scientists to erode the scientific validity of the Campra report. The single sample of ‘unknown origin’ (disclaimed in the report) is, according to them, enough to throw the whole thing out. The findings must be reproducible, and when dealing with such fine observations as via electron scanning microscopes at less than 200nM, control and sample size are everything.

I might leave it at that but for the wafer-thin ‘fact checking’ of Reuters. The very fact that they are prepared to take Pfizer’s word for it should ring alarm bells for anyone.

In the NoV camp comes, for instance, this article by Periodista Digital, which describes, quite accurately, I think, the institutional bias endemic in universities and research centres. When those research centres are funded, at least in part, by corporate science, bias comes with a profit motive. Awkward findings impact share prices.

Ironically—or perhaps it is more sinister than ironic—that is the fact exploited by our two toff YouTubers, when they presented themselves to the beleaguered Piers Corbyn as AstraZeneca shareholders.

As I have said previously, here we have life imitating the virus (or vaccine). A virus must disguise itself so as not to draw flak from human antibodies. A lie must disguise itself. Human liars disguise themselves by keeping a straight face, or maintaining eye contact. Better liars—like those trained by secret services—use more advanced techniques. A double bluff, for example, presents the lie as a lie, in order to disguise the fact that it is a lie. This is akin to the old paradox, I never tell the truth. And then there are triple bluffs and beyond that, most human beings lose the turns of plot.

Something similar is happening on the microscope slide—and more to the point, in the human body. Vaccines present a kind of bluff to the human immune system. Here’s a virus, they say. Alerted, the immune system can muster forces and produce antibodies and so on.

The human immune system defending the body is a situation akin to a secret service protecting a country, or a corporate cyber security system protecting biomedical patents. There is an entire mathematics of the interaction between Defense and Attack, neatly summed up by this diagram from the Adaptive Security and Economics Laboratory, University of Hawaii.

At first, surrounded by Attack on all sides, Defence must fortify by monitoring all attack vectors. If it permits—or pretends to permit—an attack, it learns via the classic ‘honeypot’ technique. Attack must give itself away somewhat. If nothing else, a particular attack vector is now evident. As Defence learns more and more about the Attack (sampling) it forces the Attack to concentrate on few or even a single attack vector. Ultimately, Defence has learned everything about the Attack, and envelopes all possible attack vectors. Defence has adapted to Attack.

In the case of SarsCoV2, the protein spike Attack is difficult to adapt to because the Attack adapts as soon as it is inside the cell. The bluff protein spike presented by the mRNA vaccines is in fact a double bluff. The resulting cellular and protein mechanics are perhaps too close to the real thing. Quasi real protein spike stuff happens. It may be that in the case of SarsCoV2, meeting Attacker on its own ground—the protein spike—is too risky. It’s as if, we know the wooden horse at the gates is dangerous, but we underestimate just how dangerous. The soldiers that emerge from inside look like us. mRNA vaccines are experimental. The current vaccine rollout is the wide scale clinical trial that should have been run before the rollout.

And maybe there are simpler Defences, like Ivermectin, or large doses of Vitamins C and D. These are being trialled.

What if the ProV movement held their hands up and said, Alright, these are valid concerns, we will put everything on hold until there is independent scientific consensus that A mRNA protein spike vaccines are harmless and either B do not contain GO, or C do contain GO but only for its viral protein-trapping properties?

Even if they did, NoV people would not believe them. ProV people would be horrified at being let down, at letting SarsCov2 rip through the population. Damned if we do. Damned if we don’t. Time to shift the perspective?

Charles Eisenstein has written another excellent essay. This is not just a nice guy in a woolly jumper going on about being nice to the Earth. The guy thinks. In Mob Mentality and the Unvaxxed, he refers to the primordial social function of sacrifice, especially human sacrifice, as a way of displacing violence elsewhere, outside of the human social organism. The Jews, the Blacks, the Muslims, and now the Unvaxxed.

In order to excise disorder/dissent in the ranks, society identifies some outsider or easy to ostracise element within itself, and goes to work on building an ideology that justifies ostracising or eliminating that element. Contrary to common thinking, the ideology comes after the identification of other. It is not that white people hated black people that they enslaved them, he says, but the other way around. Dehumanising mythologies about black people were developed—stories were told—in order to justify enslaving them.

Ideologies are now being spun by the mainstream about the unvaxxed, in order to justify, for instance, not countenancing their claims or not answering their call for reasoned debate. Eisenstein is prescient (or at least sharp) when says:

If the authorities follow the playbook developed to counter other domestic “threats,” we can also expect agents-provocateurs, entrapment schemes, government agents voicing violent positions to discredit the movement, and so forth…

Viz the entrapment of Piers Corbyn. Viz the ensuing and ongoing mob mentality. Corbyn’s ten grand bung was switched for Monopoly money at the last moment. Twitter is awash with tweets re Corbyn buying little plastic houses, and crap about how Piers is ‘the worst Corbyn’ — a slur against his more mainstream, yet not mainstream enough, brother Jeremy, against whom slurs and smears about ‘anti-semitism’ continue.

The Corbyn sting is an establishment triumph. One needn’t scrutinise Pieters or Manners for the stain of Big Pharma influence. One imagines their phones ringing, and its Mr Burns from The Simpsons calling to thank them profusely. Perhaps they would like shares in AstraZeneca for real. But we need only look to their obvious White Privilege. Young, sharp, well educated, well spoken white men. That privilege blinds them to the irony of their handing Corbyn Monopoly money as a prank. Whatever you might think of Piers Corbyn, he ain’t living in Mayfair. Pieters and Manners do.

But such nuance is lost. The mob is incapable of checking its rush to violence, virtual or otherwise. One thinks of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. If there is a dangerous virus out there, surely it is this. If there is a cabal working levers, this is their Big One. If the Matrix must be rebooted, this is the button to press. For there to be an Us, there must be a Them.

The Establishment Defence has honey trapped Piers Corbyn. Even if its a fake honey trap—the videos are edited and overdubbed—there is more than enough of an impression for the mob to circle round. Down with Corbyn. Down with the unvaxxed. And while we’re at it down with the other Corbyn. Down with anyone who isn’t down with Us. Good for Pieters and Manners for showing up the grubby, selfish hypocrisy lurking like a virus in our midst.

I am not a NoV person. Nor am I a V person. On forums I share or administer, I encourage people to consider opposing views, to consider they might have got it wrong. As a philosophical exercise, if not a wartime strategy.

It follows that if we are NoV we must consider, must be aware of the Good Reasons why people are V. Or if we are V, we must consider why people are NoV. What that consideration reveals is, apart from anything else, that there is an entire spectrum. The division into two camps, into V and NoV, like any such division into Us and Them is false. Let history be your fact checker on that one.

While the entrapment of Piers Corbyn is a much trumpeted blow against the NoV camp, the final word from Reuters on the question of graphene in the Pfizer vaccine should be an equally trumpeted blow against the V side.

Here it is again:

Fact Check-COVID-19 vaccines do not contain graphene oxide

VERDICT

False. Pfizer said their COVID-19 vaccines do not contain graphene oxide.

And Tony Blair said there were nuclear weapons in Iraq.

--

--

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Nizami Thirteen

Nizami Thirteen

40 Followers

Green light from the other side. Perspectives on convergence, divergence and emergence.