web analytics

Chitin as the Precursor to Graphene, Who Would Have Thunk It?

Submitted by Lot’s Wife. After Fukushima we discovered that Chitin is a sponge for radiation. Many creatures use Chitin in their skin/shell, Krill being one of them. The Krill absorbed the Fukushima radiation and it killed them and they took the radiation to Davy Jones locker, effectively cleaning the ocean for us. But not without many Unusual Mortality Events that no scientific organization related to the radiation and the Krill.

In fact my favorite 5 eyes troll spent his career testing the water and not testing the krill for the radiation. Shameful.

The broad testing in Alaska of radionuclides produced one report after Fukushima showing that radiation increased as much as a direct nuclear hit would increase it. They took the data on the next 3 years run, but then failed to publish any data. If someone has time, do a FOIA request.

I have skimmed the video, but not drawn a conclusion except this. The knowledge and ability to process and control graphene, even on a cellular level, is advanced.

Video in Spanish, with fast subtitles

The idea of a “neural lace” created with injected graphene is possible. Google Elon Musk and Neural Lace.

10 replies on “Chitin as the Precursor to Graphene, Who Would Have Thunk It?”

Glad to see you caught your error about Chitan vs Chitin. The wayback machine certainly does. What else have you missed Steve? Sad

Good stuff, she was saying Bioweapon in May of 2021, I’ll have to review my first suspicions, and of course, my outing the bad batches in July of 2021, that continued to be deployed by the Illuminati infiltration of the Jesuits and more.

Have another drink. What you are saying makes no sense to those who actually do and understand the work. Did you ever actually read the study that showed that ionizing radiation damaged chitin? It’s chitin by the way CHITIN…the dose required for damage would basically melt your face. The dose experience by krill was and is now dominated by naturally occurring rads. You can’t even spell the name of the molecule. Did you mean chitosan? Chiton? Do you even know the difference? You over estimate your comprehension at every step on every issue. It’s sad. Stick to solar panels.

Which scientific studies? And have you actually read them? In Russian? I already know the answer. Look up how much of a dose 500kGy is…there were exactly zero krill killed by ionizing radiation from Fukushima. I work with people that study Euphausia pacifica. I’ve actually collected them. You know less than you think.

5G can augment the evil – up to being mass extermination technology – of the nanotechnology AI witches’ brew in the jab/shot bio-weapon.

Factually challenged again.

We measured animals, plants and fungi. E.g. see


Tried to measure it in krill and algae. Krill aren’t gone. We couldn’t detect Fukushima derived radionuclides in plankton or algae. Sample size required too large given the low levels. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/6/15/1393456/-More-Fukushima-Question-and-Answer-Why-don-t-you-measure-contamination-in-marine-algae

Oh boy, the KOS bullshit now talks about algae, and not chitan. And then pretends 6 years later that all the CS134 is gone, therefore don’t even look, or , LOL filter millions of gallons to find some. The short lived CS134 took most Krill to Davy Jones Locker, killing them much faster than the 30 year CS half life. And data collected showed exactly that, using Krill data. Shame on those.
Let’s walk through a few simple calculations looking at radiocesium (137Cs half life ~30 years and 134Cs half life ~2 years) activities to understand why this is so. Our monitoring efforts tend to focus on radiocesium for the following reasons:

134Cs has a half life that is short enough that all other human sources to the environment have decayed away making it an ideal tracer for Fukushima contamination
next to the short lived Iodine-131 (half life ~ 8 days), Cs isotopes were released in greatest activity to the environment from Fukushima and would be most likely to represent a radiological health risk given their chemistry and propensity to be taken up by the biota
other isotopes were released in much lower amounts from Fukushima relative to Cs (see other posts here and search for plutonium and strontium for example) and would therefore be much more difficult to detect
because they are gamma emitters (unlike Pu isotopes and 90-Sr which emit alpha and beta radiation respectively) they are relatively easy and resource efficient to detect

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *