I'm going to transcribe exactly what I wrote on Chris Martenson's website earlier today, prior to your posting this video;

"I dislike how commentators like Sage Hana and "2ndsmartestguyintheworld" will throw these ideas out there, acting as force multipliers for them rather than doing due diligence. Put this together with a populace that is woefully undereducated in terms of practical science, and you have a mess of distraction."

And here's my reaction to the video'

There is embedded within the post a video of recrystallization occurring in a time lapse microscope view. The commentators have taken what is a natural process of recrystallization, and deemed it the work of nano-robotics! I kid you not.

I know what I am looking at because I spent much of my early career in the chem. lab doing trace analysis, looking through light microscopes and scanning electron microscopes at various samples. As the droplet naturally dries out under the heat of the microscope light, the solution becomes supersaturated and more crystals nucleate. I exploited this kind of crystallization at times create sample crystals large enough to get molecular ID on via micro-IR... 20 microns being the lower limit as I recall.

Somebody somewhere in the DoD is laughing at this one.....

Did I call it or what?

Expand full comment

Sorry for long answer, but here is my full description. This stuff is poison, but for far different reasons than what is said in the video. He is clearly a beginner in microscope analysis. Not meant as an insult, but as an encouragement to study more of what is really going on.

I see a short video of crystals moving around. According to Nixon this is nano-tech (because it moves?). And later he talks about 5G network. Something I know about. I designed chips and this needs a 1M-transistor chip, huge antenna and a battery system. Very easily to see, even with the naked eye, and very visible under a microscope. So technically there is no reason to think that a moving crystal can do that. Clearly something else is going on. But let me explain it even in more detail:

You can see movements like this in most microscope slides, because the heating of the lamps under the microscope cause movement of fluids. And can cause crystals to grow or dissolve. These reactions are very temperature dependent, and every chemist know this. Sometimes we even have biological life on the slides. Solution: Get real experts instead of beginners. You can even see videos on youtube about crystal growth and learn about it. There are many different crystals. Some really look very similar. Ever seen a snow-crystal grow? Looks like a circuit too.

Check out cholesterol crystals. They are square and circuit like. This is probably a variant of that chemical (Lipid from the LNPs?). You can find the crystals on google. There must be some experts in that can help with that. There are also experts in chemistry that know what crystals are formed under the microscope and can recognize what materials they are.

About nano-tech. -> I can guarantee you that there is absolutely no advanced nano-tech in the shown slides. None. For all of the following reasons: (1) Nano-tech can not self-assemble, but requires a machine that is as big as a house just to get the accuracy working. With sterile clean room, and 100% pure materials and careful quality controls. So not a living body in a polluted environment. (2) Nano-tech needs many wires and circuits to perform a simple function. And power. And a control system. There are none there. And for 5G (or Bluetooth) you even need millions and a huge antenna. (3) Nano-tech as promoted in lectures and patents are just science fiction, which are meant to collect funds. In practice they only get extreme simple tasks working with careful control in a lab. You can check that easily if you follow the link to the real-world demonstrations. They move a spiral around in the body using huge magnetic fields. It is like making a puppet move by having your hand inside it. Does this make the puppet smart or alive? No it is just the same stupid puppet. (4) Circuits need to be exactly 100% correct. And to perform functions they have millions of wires and transistors. One slight miss and it is completely broken.

They are injecting harmful artificial virus-like objects, causing long term havoc in the body. Combined with all kinds of other toxic ingredients to keep it stored (like anti-freeze). And chemicals that "activate" your immune system or actually damage it. There should not be any solid components in the injections either. It is all one toxic mixture, but there is no nano-tech in any of these videos (and I saw 90% of them).

Conclusion: There is absolutely no way something like that can self-assemble in the body. Big machines are necessary to project the circuits onto the chemical layers in 100s of 100% pure chemical processes. If something self-assembles it can only be a basic chemical or biological process.

On a positive note: I look forward to see exactly what chemical and biological processes are going on, but it is not "self-assembling nano-tech". And such theories make it far too easy for Pfizer and Gates.

Expand full comment

Dr. Nixon theorizes a bit that the wifi router was acting on the bots.

very rough paraphrase, this is not a quote:

When I closed the door (to router), it deconstructed....EMF constructing, contracting when EMF (electromagnetic frequency) is removed.

Sounds like Dark Conspiracy 5G Theory!

Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

Without a good cross-lot comparative randomized study of vial contents with multiple researchers investigating independently, I would offer that it’s impossible to say with any confidence if this is indicative of what is in the jab. Without parallel independent research and some standardized method of study, it is unreasonable to draw conclusions about what is being observed. This also means that it cannot be dismissed out of hand.

The examination of the vial contents needs to compare and cross-reference not only microscopy, but chemical and biological analysis, including sanger sequencing for genomic data.

The commentary offered in the video (and others like it) should reasonably be heard as opinion and not conclusive. This also does not mean the commentary is necessarily false. There is simply not enough data or study to draw conclusions.

Anyone claiming they know what this is or isn’t without this data is opining, at best.

When people imply that viewing or sharing such material will lead one to believe it is true is disingenuous. This argument is the cousin of “wrong think” and treats the reader/viewer as if they are children without critical faculties. It is possible to offer critical discussion without this kind of dismissive condescension.

Expand full comment

Best Pun Ever!

Expand full comment

Good to see you biting into the graphene nanobots, Sage! I agree; other than one sentence from Malone that he "doesn't know" about graphene in the vaxxxes, the rest of the red pillers Kirsch, Alexander, Rose, Nass, etc. are quantum quiet!

Expand full comment

That’s the problem with all these microscope videos of graphene oxide and nano bots etc ... I have no idea what I’m looking at. You could show me salt crystals forming under time lapse and tell me it is circuitry assembling and I would believe you. I just don’t know. I think we can definitively say that yes graphene oxide is present. Awaiting more concise information.

Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

Sage, fyi.... KK on Pfizer/Comirnaty and Malone's deceptive comments


Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

My partner and I have just watched this video and discussed. He is an engineer, highly intelligent and steeped in physics. I mistrust Wi-Fi and some emfs. He agrees with Jim H and made the point that we are observing something in 2D which is actually happening in 3D and there is the meniscus on the slide, so we aren’t really seeing what is happening. He says the reason it’s slow is because there isn’t enough energy (via heat in this case) for it to be faster. The Dr is keeping his heater on because he’s aware that makes a difference to the speed. When he goes out of the room to close the door to the router does that introduce cooler air and thus slow down the process?

I’m wondering if this is the reason Pfizer originally stored these vaccines at very low temperatures, in order to stop the crystallisation?

We both think that these are not nano bots but may well be causing blood clots as these new compounds crystallise. It could be the particles are small enough to get through the BBB then crystallise in the brain (which we think is somewhat hotter than the rest of the body). This could be why it is accumulating in organs like the liver and kidney rather than on the periphery of the body.

I think caution is required here. The Karen woman has little or no scientific knowledge and therefore has no credibility. This guy is clearly well meaning but is operating outside of his expertise I suspect.

Expand full comment

Whatever it is, no one consented to it.

Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

Regarding Jim H's comment, not a single person "vaccinated" in America has been vaccinated. These are experimental biologics. And whistle-blowers have provided hard evidence that adverse information is being withheld, intentionally unanalyzed, or analyzed and hidden.

When the New York Post broke the Hunter Biden story and every MSM outlet was calling it Russian propaganda, I said "Don't ask a question you don't want the answer to."

Why was the methodology for case counts suddenly changed and expanded outside of regulatory process?

Why were HCQ and Ivermectin dissed when a doctor in Texas saved 100% of his ICU patients using HCQ while in NYC 90% of ICU patients died without access to it?

Why? Why? Why? I got questions for days.

Expand full comment

I see that as I read on in the comments.

So now I've read on another stack that the graphene shedding is real and causing clots etc in the unvaxxed. I just spent six weeks with a pair of triple jabbed. Oy vey

Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

I see what Nixon did as simple basic observation—like Thomas Young’s early light interference experiments. He now has questions and hypotheses of what he observed. That’s basic investigation and there’s nothing wrong with it.

Now if there were more sealed vials available to construct an experiment and establish some controls, he could test those hypotheses.

But as we know from Sasha’s study that the vials are DoD property until injected, so there goes that opportunity. Unless someone goes rogue and delivers a crate of vials…

Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

Isn’t it just a crystal forming under the microscope?

For example compare: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTG8FCJZL3M

Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022·edited Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

Sage Hana was Dr. Jane Ruby all along. I mean, it doesn't make any sense, but I guess that's the point, right?

I've never seen Steve Kirsch and Stew Peters in the same room together either. So there is that.

On a serious note, why did they take out Lieber?


Expand full comment
Oct 29, 2022Liked by Sage Hana

Graphene oxide could be in the shots because it has been at least tested as an adjuvant. That’s not far fetched. As for nano it’s, Pfizer and J and J are listed as working on them. I found an interesting article about nanotechnology. It seems this could be possible. It’s always seem a bit bizarre, but we live in bizarro world. I’m for it being crystals. Would that form in the body from the injections and would the crystals be detrimental to your health? Here’s the article I found.


Expand full comment