Your argument is just the word though. It's not based on anything else. It's semantically misleading in the most obvious way.
You're right. My argument is about the word. I don't know why you couldn't understand that. I was saying they CHOSE coronavirus as the family because of the word. Not the shape of the made up virus. I'm not saying the coronavirus family doesn't exist. I'm not saying the family of virus wasn't named after its shape. I'm saying the fake virus they made up, Sars-CoV-2, does not exist. The lie that it belongs the the coronavirus family is a choice the perpetrators of this hoax made.
Your argument, and more to my point the common arguments that I've heard on this topic don't seem to follow a straight line and just don't hold up in my opinion. I actually did entertain the idea that it might be completely fake when people started talking about it not being isolated, but the more I read y'all's arguments and sources there were too many weak points.
Can you explain how a sequence can be made without an isolated sample? Think of the sequence like a movie. Like "Schindler's List." The movie itself is supposed to be a representation of something in reality. The fact that the holohoax didn't happen make that sequence bullshit. Why do you trust the sequence without an isolated specimen?
(post is archived)