He does, you just didn't read the part where he does. I quoted the most relevant section in post #627 to get your attention, but the complete sentence is this:
**
They claimed that, “ribosomal RNA depletion was performed during library construction,” however, see page 43 as to why this is dubious as there remained a high match for known human RNA sequences.
**
Going to page 43 of his essay, we find this (bolding the most relevant section):
**
MORE DECEPTION FROM WUHAN?
In early 2022, a mathematician working with Dr Stefan Lanka released an analysis of the associated sequence data produced by Fan Wu et al.136 Startlingly, it was concluded that:
a repeat of the de novo assembly with Megahit (v.1.2.9) showed that the published results could not be reproduced. We may have detected (ribosomal) ribonucleic acids of human origin, contrary to what was reported [by Fan Wu et al.]...Evidence is lacking that only viral nucleic acids were used to construct the claimed viral genome for SARS- CoV-2. Further, with respect to the construction of the claimed viral genome strand, no results of possible control experiments have been published. This is equally true for all other reference sequences considered in the present work. In the case of SARS-CoV-2, an obvious control would be that the claimed viral genome cannot be assembled from unsuspected RNA sources of human, or even other, origin.
Aside from the fact that virology’s current methodologies for finding viruses should be rejected, the lack of reproducibility of their own experiment instantly raises questions about the circumstances in which the original inventors of SARS-CoV-2 announced their new virus to the world. Indeed, this independent analysis only obtained 28,459 contigs, significantly less than the number (384,096) described by Fan Wu et al. Additionally, the longest contig independently obtained was 29,802 nucleotides, which was 672 nucleotides shorter than Fan Wu’s, meaning that, “the published sequence data cannot be the original reads used for assembly.” The mathematician's analysis also concluded that:
Alignment with the nucleotide database on 05/12/2021 showed a high match (98.85%) with "Homo sapiens RNA, 45S preribosomal N4 (RNA45SN4), ribosomal RNA" (GenBank: NR_146117.1, dated 04/07/2020). This observation contradicts the claim in [1] that ribosomal RNA depletion was performed and human sequence reads were filtered using the human reference genome (human release 32, GRCh38.p13). Of particular note here is the fact that the sequence NR_146117.1 was not published until after the publication of the SRR10971381 sequence library considered here. This observation emphasizes the difficulty of determining a priori the exact origin of the individual nucleic acid fragments used to construct claimed viral genome sequences.
**Source:
A Farewell To Virology (Expert Edition) | drsambailey.com
