……make it a federal hate crime to criticize Dr Fauci. No kidding.
What utter garbage. But, it WAS put in a nice packaged format that looks all official with an official looking bibliography that supposedly supports the claims……so it must be SCIENCE!
An aside: somewhere along the line, the,Libs got the idea that as long as they make of bibliography to look sciency, it proves their point, no matter how much garbage they list, selectively quote, or misrepresent. In this case, 25% of the bibliography citing are his own works, and much of the rest are partisan opinions.
Link: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001369#pbio.3001369.ref001
(no message)
If you choose to respond, get ready to defend yourself.
(no message)
fairly obscure story. He may have even had to issue a request. These things take time.
Dr. Fauci...who has served multiple GOP and Democratic administrations with distinction...who has the complete support of all other medical professionals the world over. His only failing has been in contradicting Donald Trump who managed to disgrace himself in that arena, repeatedly (e.g. his foray into medical breakthroughs such as using bleach and UV light to cure COVID)...a 'sin' that no malignant narcissist can ever tolerate and therefore must be attacked.
While you have a special desire to go after Dr. Fauci, you have now, with this post, branched out to spread doubt, distrust and distain for the larger scientific community...even to the point of casting dispersion on the use of bibliographies in support of printed articles.
You call the author of the paper, Peter Hotez, a "crackpot", when in fact he's an accomplished medical scientist as the attached link shows. Based on just this, one would be justified in comparing Dr. Hotez' CV with yours and coming to the conclusion that the term "crackpot" really belonged to you.
You are just one small example of a much larger effort to demean and undermine scientific institutions and practitioners which has become the sole province of those who support Donald Trump. This post won't stop you, but it will show the readers what game you're playing.
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hotez
(no message)
…..and of course beyond his utter lack of credibility, there is the article itself which has nonscientific opinion pieces in its’ bibliography cited as scientific evidence as well (hilariously, a quarter of the referenced sources are from his own personal writings), and there as his false conclusions. Picking and choosing facts and events to support a chosen narrative is not scientific research.
The guy has a history of these claims as well as a history of having to retract them when receiving a letter from a lawyer.
I am not at all surprised that you believe in this type of pseudoscience…..you post it all of the time in your links. You may think it makes you look smart and gives your opinions legitimacy, but it does not. In fact, it simply reveals you.
I will not engage further with you in your tiresome propaganda schtick. I have shown here that the author who cites the threat of antivaxers has a past history of making false claims about antivaxers threatening him. He is not credible. Have at it.
PS - 0859 - done with editing for spellcheck changes and typing from my Apple
Link: https://sharylattkisson.com/2021/06/read-dr-peter-hotez-defamation/
(no message)
(no message)
women, "hehers" and "herhes." Why not, more competitors because there would be more categories and more trophies handed out for self esteem, while keeping the competition level fair.
(no message)