A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
I would be interested what Jesse would say if you just posted the list of scientists working at WIV and ask which ofthese people he thought might have deliberately leaked the virus. Or are they all equally plausible
-
I'm pretty sure he'd say "equally plausible", because he does seem to have a very hard time weighing evidence andutilizing probabilities at the moment. It's _exactly_ the same line of thinking that led to half the country believing the election was stolen - because nothing can ever be known with 100% certainty.
-
It's the exact same debate - Bloomshitters saying "I'm just asking questions here" and "we just want to know the truth - don't you want to know the truth"? And then words by folks like us will be twisted to make it seem like _we_don't actually want to know the truth, but rather want to push an agenda.
-
It's dangerous, that's for sure.
-
2021-05-14 08:22
Robert F. Garry
And Shi is right - what data could she produce that would satisfy this crowd?
-
And, here's eDim revealing the true agenda beyond relitigating GoF research restrictions. [shared file(s): image.png]
-
Unlike others, at least he's clear and consistent :wink:
-
All about the narrative and the agenda, which for eDim boils down simply to virologist=bad. For others it's China=bad, P01 authors=bad, GoF=bad, animal research = bad, etc.