At least share some sources to support your counter argument. Here’s what I am referring to with regards to the scientific inaccuracy of PCR testing:
https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/
In short, the test is looking for pieces of RNA sequence that are not even unique to Covid 19. That’s like looking for vitamin C in a food sample to prove it’s an apple.
I took the time to read this article. It is pseudoscience, written by people who presumably want to sell their book.
Everything in the article is factually inaccurate, and they cherry-pick quotes from a series of scientists then offer them up completely out of context to try and back up their hypothesis. The core of which seems to be that months into the pandemic scientists still haven't conclusively shown that SARS-CoV2 causes COVID-19, based on the idea that nobody has isolated and purified the virus. They allude to the fact nobody has done this is a worldwide coverup by scientists and medical professionals, for mysterious reasons.
This is patently untrue, there are numerous studies documenting isolation of the virus from samples of sick patients, some with EM images, so you can literally see a picture of it if you need to. I'm not sure why these people are so obsessed with purifying the virus, there is absolutely no need to do that in order to demonstrate that it causes disease. We can determine the genome sequence of the virus with or without isolating it from patient samples and compare it to genomic sequences of all other coronaviruses. This is known as genomics, which has revolutionised microbiology over the past 20 years or so. This also allows us to design diagnostic tests specific for regions of the genome that
are unique to SARS-CoV2. These tests are then validated against a panel of respiratory viruses to ensure the they
are specific for SARS-CoV2.
If a scientist discovered that all of the RTqPCR tests being used for diagnosing COVID-19 were seriously flawed, they could do experiments to demonstrate it (such as showing cross-reactivity against the panel of viruses I mention above), write it up, then publish a dogma smashing paper that would massively further their career, making them a scientific superstar. If I could do that I would! But the fact is that these diagnostic tests are specific.
I would suggest in the future you apply the same amount of skepticism to random internet articles that you seem to currently reserve for medical science performed by healthcare professionals.