You’re conflating “proof” with NIH just admitting it. Since you have all day.
Also, don’t make things up, despite your predilection for doing so.
Rolo to be compliant, per Seattle Times
- Thread starter M-I-Coug
- Start date
You’re conflating “proof” with NIH just admitting it. Since you have all day.
Also, don’t make things up, despite your predilection for doing so.
Did you read this one either? The whole article ends with this:
We wavered between 2 and 3 Pinocchio's " because there still are enough questions about the work at the Wuhan lab to warrant further scrutiny, even if the NIH connection to possible gain-of-function research appears so far to be elusive"
Did you get that: "connection...gain of function...elusive"
Again, do even know what position you are defending? You claim Fauci lied about the funding of gain of function that would have been purposed to deliberately create a virus that would be more transmissible and dangerous to humans. That's what Rand Paul was alleging. That's what you are positing. You apparently think it has been established as fact. It has not. You're so lazy, it's embarrassing.
These links you are providing are mainly dealing with the lab-creation theory and whether it is an open question to continue to investigate that angle. I know of no one reputable who say we should NOT look into that.
I can continue posting passages from this article as well if you need me too, since you cannot make the link between what you are arguing and the evidence required to support that argument. Taihtsat
If the research paper stating that NIH provided funding doesn’t convince you, what will?
Why don’t you make a list of the probables, I’ll let you know. You have all day.
The article you cite as an admission from NIH says: “The NIH grant includes language that some say suggests gain-of-function research; NIH says that is a misinterpretation.” Read better.
In response to things a stupid person posts on this message board.
Second time- If the research paper stating that NIH provided funding doesn’t convince you, what will?
You're soooo Cute when you post "lol" after being called out on your ignorance to facts. Its like you do it due to the fact you're a progressive elitist who thinks they are morally and intellectually superior than everyone else. Its also because you're "informed" and by posting "lol", you know that your time in responding to such maniacal posts would just be wasted.
Says the guy who in another thread made factually unsupported claims, and when challenged to back up those claims, disappeared from the conversation. I see you. Taihtsat
Simply laughing at YOU again calling someone else stupid. The question was to clarify what DGib was claiming there is proof of funding specifically for. Because it is disputed, and the proof doesn’t appear to extend as far as he appears to be claiming.
And true It is easy to see it is a waste of time to respond to you in particular. You rarely provide any facts to support your mostly conspiracy theory claims you parrot from whatever conservative media you consume. You have little in way to offer of any substance and your main retort is nearly always some unsupported ad hominen that only serves to make yourself appear juvenile.
Comments from Ryan Leaf. I tend to agree. If Rolo has a medical or religious exemption, then just say that and say you don't wish to discuss it further. If he's going to get the vax, just say that. I don't understand this little cat and mouse game he seems to be playing. It comes off as dismissive.
Nothing parroted, and what he claimed had already been stated in another post. The information is there to dispute that Fauci did in fact, via EcoHealth Alliance, fund the Wuhan Lab for gain of function research (as it is defined). Not to mention there were several doctors on record saying what the Wuhan lab was doing, was GAIN OF FUNCTION. A letter written by the lead research scientist/doctor was later produced, THANKING the NIH and Fauci cronies will absolutely come out and say "it wasn't gain of function" to protect their own. Is it really hard to believe that Fauci is trying to cover his own azz so that he doesn't look like he helped create the sh!tshow we are currently living in? I guess the lab leak theory was just a conservative talking point as well? "To question Dr Fauci is to question science itself"........ Your Demi-God is all knowing. Whatever dumb dumb
Did that reserch paper specifically document factual, concrete evidence that funding for GOF was given to the WIV, you know...in China!?!?
Ryan Leaf, like two minutes removed from his latest wife beating scandal or pill binge, is the last person who should be giving others life advice.
He's just stating the obvious, I don't think you need to be the Dali Lama to do that.
That is true to a point. But Truth, Fact, Logic, is Truth, Fact, Logic, no matter who says it, no matter if Ryan Leaf says it.
Ryan Leaf also just picked UW to finish 12-0 in 2021.
UW's last perfect season was 2008.
So if you are in rehab the only person you should speak to is someone who is an expert on the matter who was a patient themselves ?
I think the fact he has tons of life experiences and has been around the college game gives him perspective .
Leaf also said this is one of the most talented WSU teams in years.
There is probably some old Leaf quotes in support of Steve Birnbaum taking over as QB in 1998, and sure enough Birnbaum won his first 3 games as starter.
Leaf should write a book about getting people to give you another chance. I'd buy that book. Listening to him talk about how to be a decent human being? I'll pass.
Obviously, Ryan needs a job and wants to do the media and public speaking gigs. Hard to take him seriously as a moral authority.
Claims made by you without evidence can be rejected without evidence. Although, out of the goodness of my heart I've provided plenty anyway. Taihtsat
Still obfuscating. Third time- If the research paper stating that NIH provided funding doesn’t convince you, what will?
he heard it from rand paul
Again to you...where does this paper say they funded GOF in china? Should be real easy for you to find and produce.
Dgib... There is no convincing these morons of anything. They still believe Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election.
Actually i don't believe that at all. Now, having dispensed with that little side- bar, care to take a crack at this NIH claim?
What if I believe that Trump tried to collude with Russia but failed because 1) they didn't have information worthwhile and 2) he was bumbling rube and wasn't smart enough to make use of anything that they had?
As mentioned by Krusty though, politics really shouldn't have anything to do with the discussion about getting the vaccination done but here we are anyway.
I wasn't involving politics... I was making a correlation involving one's ideology. Since you're so convinced that Trump attempted to, I guess we could group you in with my previous statement. Forget the fact that it was proven the DNC actually weaponized our corrupted FBI to help shape this narrative but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your feelings.
If you don't think that Donald Trump was extremely willing to collude, that says a lot about your naivete on the matter. As far as the DNC goes, they have plenty of skeletons in their closet. This may seem impossible, but you can hate Donald Trump and not like the Democrats at the same time.
Did Donald Jr meet with Russians? Did Trump lie and say no one from his inner circle ever met with the Russians? Did Don junior say August would be a great time to release information about Hillary? If Chelsea had done the same and there was written proof as there was in Don juniors case, I would have wanted Hillary impeached immediately.
The easiest answer could have been, former Pres Trump go to the FBI, tell them what his son had done, and gone out and said "my son is inexperienced in terms of politics and made a mistake by engaging a country that has 800 nukes pointed at us.
