George Knapp

It turns out we have precedent for this, that

It is an expected thing to have a high significant percentage of junk DNA.

There have been other ancient human samples that have been recovered, and it's 30 to 60 percent of unknown DNA that that is natural, that that is known when you take these samples.

kind of ancient samples and put them through analysis.

So all these things that seem so mysterious, and maybe you can tell me more about the DNA, but all these things that are propagated as so mysterious, oh, junk DNA, they're really explainable.

And it makes me mad.

It makes me mad that people are being taken advantage of.

Can you tell me a little bit about the junk DNA thing?

Yeah.

And George.

Yeah, I just I just read something the other night.

I want to make sure it's correct.

But George, I was reading about these specific ancient human samples that were taken and they all showed 30 to 60 percent unidentified reads.

And I think that that is they say in all these articles I was reading about it, like peer reviewed articles.

that um that's normal so that's why i think jesse was trying to get colossal biosciences because they specialize in ancient dna analysis and then removing all the things that are known that are contamination and i think that's the hope for everybody but kind of all that's dead for me if you guys have found absolute manipulation of um bone structure in the in these beings

Just look at ancient human samples.

It's 30 to 60% unidentified reeds across the board.

I was looking it up last night.

It's not something anomalous.

What do you think of, I've heard people say, well, wait a second, you guys are wrong because, you know, the fingerprints, they're very, you know, linear and they're not normal swirls.