We didn't even get into stage one
How virus identified

From one source...
Virus identification is performed either by indirect immunofluorescence of virus-infected cells using group- and type-specific monoclonal antibodies, or RT-PCR on extracts of cell supernatants using specific primers or probes


Neither of the above is accurate
One is indirect
The other is not accurate due to methodology

Another method is electron microscope
That also has limitations being static etc

Here's a resource

[www.labome.com]


As the above states all methods have limitations

So when we talk about claiming that a virus is causing an epidemic we need at least three steps as many people have been saying

one is identifying exists
Two proving that is infecting the body and
three it's contagious.

we talk a lot about infection and contagion not a lot of time has spent on the actual identification of it so as you can see with the above that is really depending on processes that are simply not accurate

As opposed to identifying a mosquito we have the ability to observe its form and functions
To say well yes this mosquito injected proboscis and had this effect etc


So since scientists at cdc and elsewhere claim that this virus is causing an epidemic it falls upon them to satisfy these requirements

And so what have they done to identify? They used inaccurate PCR


and as you can see below in this reference they need to find the genetic sequence and if you look at it you can see that a lot of estimation and modification and millions of base pairs etc


[mra.asm.org]

That's not science

That's VOODOO. And not just because it's over my head

Too much opportunity for error