“The Bacillus anthracis in this attack had additionally been coated with a substance to eliminate the electrostatic charge so that the spores would not be attracted to one another and clump together, thus increasing their ability to remain aerosolized.”
And if questioned, they'd undoubtedly tell you that they never actually had any access to the attack anthrax and only got their information from the media (which includes Science Magazine).
There appear to be COUNTLESS articles in respected journals where the authors just mindlessly repeat totally BUGUS information about the attack anthrax that they read somewhere in the media.
I just hope they aren’t reading TOTAL BULLSHIT information from Beecher’s article. The difference between the media and a peer-reviewed science article, of course, is that the journal will correct itself by publishing future papers pointing out the abusrdities that slip through.
Occassionally even the editor of a journal will publicly state that a paper should never have been published in the first place - although that only happens in extreme cases such as Beecher’s paper.
By the way Ed, what’s BUGUS information?
Is that what you continually post around here? The same old fiction - just to “bug us” all?
You know stuff like - “there’s no principle to coatings”.
I was just passing it on to show the stitch of confusion that Dr. Rebel has sewn across the landscape.
The stink of his BS has wafted even into the renown biodefense laboratories.
Where will it end?