Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

Yeah, except your specific criticisms were clearly not based upon any reading if the actual paper. You probably squared it in your mind with some argument that they are all the same or something, but if you want to argue that this isn't in bad faith, you can't make such bad faith judgments. Yiu are very protective of your beliefs and avoidant of any information that might make you question them.

 

Your paper was like all others in that ‘isolation’ is so debased as to include a host of other materials such that, in any other scenario, the prospective sample would be considered contaminated. The established method is so comical that CTE (cell death) purportedly evidence of virus, can be affected by adding yeast.

 

Which, again, has absolutely nothing to do with the paper. You criticized their methods for things they didn't even do (while saying it was in a section that didnt even exist).

 

This is you and your habit of wailing away until you forget what your swinging at.

Yes, I originally directed you to the wrong section. You caught it. I then directed you to the appropriate section that destroyed any notion of isolation.

Demonstrating your ironclad resistance to learning, you retreated to “Ha! You originally directed me to the wrong section, this proving you don’t know how to interpret a study, ergo viruses do exist you wingnut!”

 

"Wrong section" = "section that doesn't exist"

Then, when you sort of directed me to a section, you didn't even know what was in it, as you started talking about mediums in general and had no idea what medium they used.

Basically, you are trying to claim that you act in good faith but you really aren't. Your wild swinging away at it suggests that you never read it or lack so much background that you can't even read the relatively easy to understand parts (i.e., what was the medium, what species was affected by the virus, etc.).

Most of the time, when people push absurdist ideas online, this is what happens. If you get them off their talking points from some website they read, they fumble around hopelessly to try to apply those talking points, even when they aren't applicable to the specific information presented. Until they can reconstruct their belief by avoidance.

 

D’uh! The appropriate section detailed the materials used. Your response here just further underscores the likelihood that, had I directed you to the appropriate section to begin with, your ironclad cultic tendencies would have blinded you from seeing it.

 

It did. But you didn't know what they were, at least based upon your criticism of them, which was about other mediums.

 

So the prospective virus was mixed with other materials ? Why is it so hard for you to admit that, at bottom, virology is philosophical and presuppositional ? Why can’t you get past “man on TV” rigor ? What would you have to lose ?

 

So it isn't isolation unless it occurs in a literal black hole? Because that is the only way to avoid "mixing with other materials." Isolation is about the elimination of other microbes while maintaining the virus. But all matter is a "material."

Because it isn't, although you appear to need it to be.

I tried to get to a rigorous discussion utilizing a specific scientific study. You didn't read it or even understand the basic parts.

 

For starters, no one even knew what a virus was supposed to look like until they cultured a tissue sample in goop, centrifuged to reduce to smallest particles, burned and stain said particles, then looked through a powerful microscope and declared “Look! A virus!”

 

Do you believe in bacteria? Because the exact same thing can be said about them as well.

 

Yes, we know the bacteria exist. We also know it is not harmful in itself. Yet we persist in believing that it is.

 

Quite the combination of hubris and stupidity on display here.

 

I’m an internet virologist since March 2020. The overwhelming majority of the global scientific community is wrong and I am right. Worse yet, I think I’m clever.

 

Don't ever let the sheeple convince you that anthrax or botulism is harmful.

Getting redpilled re: germ theory is a new one from my perspective.

 

I agree.

 

So you’re a modern demonologist then ?

 

I'll be outside stepping on rusty nails if anybody needs me.

 

Yes, toxins are real and can be harmful.

 

derp derp derp