Intelligent Trolls Are Now Saying Genetics Is a Scam

What's wrong with that?

During the 12 months, I have encountered a number of trolls/bots/humans whose train had left the tracks. The latest ones are extremely smart and sophisticated. In this article, I’ll refer to such trolls/bots/humans as Entities, which I will abbreviate as EY.

How do EY operate?

1. EY usually gives you something first in order to gain your trust;

2. floods comment sections with irrelevant, confusing, or misleading comments in order to make the sections unreadable;

3. employs mind-bending tricks in order to exhaust the reader and force them into brainless submission;

4. isolates and decontextualizes contents in order to be able to use straw man arguments and false analogies;

5. EY never completes its arguments in order to make sure the process can never end; when forced into completing an argument, it tends to attack you ad hominem (sometimes going as far as posting long diatribes) or, on preferred occasions, politely vanishes;

6. eventually, it tries to discredit you in order to get rid of an opponent of the official narrative that they actually serve.

How about the argument that genetics is a scam?

The smartest trolling ever.

It uses a false analogy:

First, EY points out that “viruses” exist only in computer simulations and electron microscopy (where anything can be labeled a “virus). This is where they are telling the truth and draw you in.

Next, EY sets up an analogy between virology and genetics by saying that both are using computer simulations; true again.

This is where the analogy turns false: EY reverses the logic by claiming that the use of computer simulations in genetics is false, because it is false in virology.

EY supports the false analogy by pointing out that genetics is infinitely more complex than the human brain. This is true again, but the AI I described many times (last time in my previous article) is also infinitely smarter than humans, and it can perform simulations of techniques that can be employed in the real world, too. This is when well-meaning people can also fall into the EY’s trap, because they include themselves into the false analogy, when they admit that they are indeed not smart enough to take advantage of the level of knowledge the implementation of genetics would require, but they fail to realize the AI functions well beyond human knowledge or understanding.

So, again, EY is correct, when it is saying that genetics is a pseudo-science, when humans do it, but EY tactfully omits that the self-improving graphene-based quantum AI can do it and, by any reasonable estimates, is already doing it. Humans, of course, have no idea what the AI is doing, but that doesn’t bother the technocrats; they are satisfied, because their technology works.

Russian botanist Michurin¹ was the first to take advantage of inherited traits and developed fruits and vegetables with various characteristics. It was a slow process, but it worked, which alone proved that genetics is at work in real life. Genetic manipulation speeds up the process. It indubitably exists in GMO plants or mosquitoes² that “vaccinate” you, and the word is out that the Chinese (thus everyone else) have already crossed humans with pigs (well, that’s a redundant process in many cases³, but who am I to say that).

DNA carries the code for the body to grow and to function. Cells are replaced in the body periodically and after seven years, chances are, not a single atom is the same in it as before.

The outcome of genetic programming is heavily influenced by environmental variables. When the body has enough time to adjust to wild environmental changes, the DNA mutates accordingly in order to keep the body alive. When time is lacking, illness/death occurs⁴.

I agree that when the Soviets bumped into the mRNA chain reaction in 1981, it must have been by accident. To their credit, they were smart enough to realize it could easily end human life on Earth, if employed in public, so they did not unleash its power as a genetic weapon⁵.

The accidental finding, however, opened up a Pandora’s box and the cat is out of the bag: the technology is too intriguing and precious not to experiment on. While the secret US labs must have developed the (sooner-or-later) lethal injections that the official narrative fraudulently calls “vaccines” (and keep developing more), there must be mRNA experiments, too, in controlled environments. Why? Because it can be done.

So, what’s happening in humans today?

There is no question that the self-assembling nanotech⁶ was in most vials, and it is also clear that the delivery systems have become so unnoticeable and versatile that there is a good chance that nobody is a “pureblood” anymore. (I even asked Ana Mihalcea to keep checking the blood of the uninjected, because I don’t have the equipment, and not much later she confirmed. Of course, at this point (added on May 4, 2025, I don’t have much to say for Ana), especially if you read the comments in the following post, too:

It is possible to argue that the nanotech “only” turns the subject into an element of the IoT in order to track it, but many signs suggest that after it communicates with the central AI⁷, it receives instructions and takes control over specific bodily functions and can even issue a death warrant. Full control of a subject can be achieved by the nanotech anchored in the body receiving specific instructions through 5G:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/a-new-classic-on-directed-energy

DNA has been used in forensic procedures and presented as evidence in courts of law. Many people have been released from prison after being proven innocent by DNA evidence. DNA has been collected through genetic tests (for being prone to certain inherited conditions), blood tests, PCR tests, paternity tests, and even in breathalyzers. The data must have been fed to the central AI. It can be used for identifying targets, although allegedly the nanotech already assigns a MAC address to its host, which is enough for the global wireless network to ID someone:

The MAC Address System: A Bio-Digital Interface?

Of course, synthetic proteins, as I have observed before, can act at human-machine interface:

What else is a person’s DNA good for, except for genetic manipulation⁸? The anchored nano-computer is able to forward instructions to the body, so it cannot be excluded that some of the instructions include the manipulation of the target’s DNA.

It is a fatal mistake to underestimate the central AI.

This is how false analogy works:

Note: I realize that there are many more questions left unanswered, but this is only a journalistic article. Still, I will keep close attention to the comments and will make sure that participants exchange ideas respectfully and stick to the topic.

1. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ivan-Vladimirovich-Michurin

2. https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/no-need-for-any-more-vaccinations

3. The royals are a good example:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/welcome-to-the-fake-world-neo

4. Of course, there are many other causes of illness:

https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/what-makes-people-sick-apart-from

5. I predicted the use of genetic weapons about three decades ago, when it became clear to me that such weapons can target specific members of the populace.

6. As Proton Magic put it, they are “small conductive materials in colloid suspension clump together and can communicate with EMFs passing thru them.”

7. https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-stupidity-of-ai-assists-human

8. The technology is literally being marketed even as “cure for cancer,” which is supposed to break public opposition against it.