Probly time to take a porn break, gassie. You're getting overexcited again.
When an overwhelming minority of a profession of learned scholars and advanced degree holders who are trained in scientific method are what you hang your hard on it’s laughable.
But there are fringes in every profession. The problem with you pining ransom note and Jane is that there is only one conclusion in their and your view. None of you are particularly open to any other explanations It is this that is contradictory to scientific method.
But please stop pinging them when you respond to me out of respect to our mutual requests of each other to not engage directly
Thank you for your consideration and adherence to the rules of the forum.
That is INDIRECT engagement between you and them; I ping those people so they can find what I wrote.
Probly time to take a porn break, gassie. You're getting overexcited again.
Haha, look who's talking.
But please stop pinging them when you respond to me out of respect to our mutual requests of each other to not engage directly
Nothing gets poor gassie to spaz out spasmodically more than pinging Ransomnote and (especially) Jane Long. (pinging them out of FR etiquette rule #69 subsection Q).
Like as if they aren't reading each post on this thread already.
Wee gassie still has nightmares from the numerous whoopin's them two laid upon him his tender bottom. His therapist recommended he not even look at their typed names. It triggers him somethin' fierce.
His lawyers have also been in consultation.
#MentalHealthTakesAVillage
"Hang your hard on" ? Stop typing with one hand, troll.
Science is never determined by consensus. You gave away game, set, and match right there.
Counterexample: Lister.
Counterexample: "More doctors smoke Camel than any other cigarette"
Counterexample: Heliobacter and ulcers.
Counterexample: Ivermectin and the FDA posts public service ads "Stop it. You are not a horse."
$hot $hill$. If an OTC was found good enough, the whole tens of billions of dollars for EUA goes out the window: and the chance of establishing a miraculous bridgehead to use mRNA based shots for everything under the sun going forward.
Get rekt. The authorities were lying about everything under the sun in every possible way from the beginning of this.
And by defying established protocols, e.g. 10-year periods to look at jabs for side effects, ignoring or losing or reclassifying side effects reported to VAERS and allowing more deaths reported to VAERS in less than a year, than reported for all real vaccines combined over 30 years, re-defining the very meaning of the word vaccine, totally unnecessary lockdowns and masking, overlooking protocols which saved patients on ventilators (which I posted to you personally) and to which you replied (literal exact cut-and-paste):
"An OTC for sickle cell? Ok. I am game to hear what saved 85% of patients. On ventilators. I am really really sure there was no such critter Strike Three"
Sticking your nose in the air and saying "I am always right, because DOCTOR!" (either on your own behalf, or the medical establishment, or Pfauci/Pfizer/Moderna) is not gonna work.
Even aside from the well known reproducibility problem in medicine.
We KNOW the establishment is lying beyond any of our darkest nightmares of 5 years ago.
We KNOW that Big Pharma has its hand up the FDA's rear like a puppet.
We KNOW that some of the non profit groups countering "Vax disinformation" (a Marxist neologism, like "TERF"), are also doing "climate change disinformation". We KNOW the Climate Change pushers, tried to professionally ruin the careers of those upsetting the apple cart.
So trying to say "see, they're not real scientists, or they're not recognized, or not peer review" or even "lied about working at Baylor" isn't gonna cut it. If you were honest, you'd have posted his side of that story too.
The jab pushers, and those defending them credibility left, not even a shred of it.
And those who "praise with faint damns" the jab pushers, while using strawmen on those pushing against the jabs, no matter what sanctimonious excuses they hide behind, have chosen their side: if they were honest they would be LOUDLY pushing the most rigorous of the evidence against the jabs, instead of alternating between hiding that evidence, shooting the messenger, and pompously and fatuously pushing mere credentialism.
Get stuffed.