Replies

A nice troll attempt at a conversational fork (like the chess move): you wanted me to either address the "only information I've provided" and leave the secondary slur (itself multi-layered) about Kirsch, Malone, Mercola alone; or get caught up in a secondary flame war about Kirsch, Malone, Mercola alone, and leave unrefuted the idea I've only been posting from kooks.

Sod off, troll, I'll refute both.

You said in post 350, talking about me: "So far, the only information you’ve provided is from a bunch of crackpot conspiracy kooks.

You were replying to my post 337.
That was in response to your post 328.
Your post 328 was replying to my post 271.
Post 271 quoted the litigation between the Attorneys General of Missouri and several other states, talking about 45 US govt. officials coordinating with social media to censor stuff they didn't like.

So you're openly lying through your foul teeth about "the only information I've provided" being from "a bunch of crackpot conspiracy kooks" : I provided information from state attorneys general.

And your attack on Kirschk, Malone, and Mercola is false and itself the kind of misinformation and "without evidence" which you attack everyone else with.

As well as linking legitimate researchers to kooks (conveniently not naming them, allowing you to fill in the name of anyone you want later), making the false charge that to accept the presentation of anyone on the list, compels a person to defend all of them.

Sod Off, Lying Troll.