Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: EdLake
"smaller than naturally occurring anthrax spores"? Really? Is that possible? Check it out.


That's your misinterpretation. Of course, they really meant clumps of spores being large - all naturally occurring anthrax spores come in clumps of tens or even hundereds of spores. Thus it was very unusual to find single spores.

But you've dodged the question. Do you know better than Chris Weis?

Why are all these qualified PhDs saying the spores were altered? Are they ALL wrong?

And you also dodged my question about Meselson. Do you have full confidence in his skills, knowledge and opionions concerning anthrax bioweapons after his 15 years of getting it COMPLETELY wrong over Sverdlovsk?
126 posted on 01/24/2004 10:32:23 AM PST by TrebleRebel (If you're new to the internet, CLICK HERE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]


To: TrebleRebel
all naturally occurring anthrax spores come in clumps of tens or even hundereds of spores. Thus it was very unusual to find single spores

Nonsense. Where did you get that nonsense? It seems to be some misconception derived from speculation about van der Waals forces.

I've discussed the subject of spore clumps at length with Martin Hugh-Jones at LSU. He's probably the world's leading expert on the subject. Spores do not clump together in Nature. They have no opportunity to clump together in clumps of "hundreds" of spores. Natural "clumps" consist of tens or hundreds of spores mixed with animal fats and other animal materials, plus whatever happens to be in the ground under the dead animal: dirt, decaying vegetation, etc.

Why are all these qualified PhDs saying the spores were altered? Are they ALL wrong?

They were just speculating. Time will tell if their speculation was correct or not.

And you also dodged my question about Meselson.

I'm not "dodging" it. I'm ignoring it. It's an attempt to get into some kind of personal attack upon Professor Meselson. It's some kind of ad hominem argument where instead of discussing what Professor Meselson has said about the anthrax you want to discuss something he said in the past - with the idea that if you can prove something there it will have some meaning on everything he says. It's the same reason you bring up things about me that have nothing to do with the case. It's personal attacks. When you can't argue the facts effectively, you attack people personally. I won't sink to that level.

Ed

www.anthraxinvestigation.com

129 posted on 01/24/2004 11:15:17 AM PST by EdLake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson