Joe Rogan Victim Of Cancel Culture? Spotify Caves to the Viewpoint Censorship Crowd ?

vibise said:
Virologists routinely mutate infectious viruses, or clones with viral segments, which is often necessary to understand how these viruses work. Not all such experiments qualify as restricted GOF experiments, and critics do not seem to understand this.

References to newspaper articles is not sufficient as "proof" for such serious accusations.
Click to expand...
I took a further look at that Asia Times article. The first paragraph states that the article is based on something from the Daily Mail tabloid, and a subsequent link goes to a Fox News interview with Matt Gaetz!!!

None of this is evidence. Show a serious connection with facts and dates derived from appropriate official documents.
 
vibise said:
Well, then provide those facts in an organized way, and then explain why there is no lawsuit or serious attempt to remove Fauci from his position and charge him with crimes.

The fact is that GOF covers a lot of territory, and making changes in viral proteins is an important way to help us understand how they function and how they respond to the immune system. SOME changes can alter pathological properties, and SOME such changes are deliberately made. But all of these things are not equal. Your side is deliberately ignoring these distinctions in order to smear an honorable, respected scientist.
Click to expand...
Again no charges not crime. You really can't think complicated things can you?

The little Hobbit lied as he funded GOF research. He's the head leftist weasel
 
vibise said:
So present it.
Click to expand...
It would bounce off your head and that is why the problem is with you and not the evidence. By the by, in case you forgot. You will not find what you are not looking for. And if I did you would hand wave or ignore. This is nothing more than childish game playing. We live in an adult world. You would not make it for a week in my world and it would be Democrats who would terminate your employment.
 
Yakuda said:
Again no charges not crime. You really can't think complicated things can you?

The little Hobbit lied as he funded GOF research. He's the head leftist weasel
Click to expand...
Well perjury is a crime, and he has not been charged, so maybe your claim of perjury is unfounded.
 
Harry Leggs said:
It would bounce off your head and that is why the problem is with you and not the evidence. By the by, in case you forgot. You will not find what you are not looking for. And if I did you would hand wave or ignore. This is nothing more than childish game playing. We live in an adult world.
Click to expand...
Your Asia Times article provides no actual smoking gun, but does link to dodgy sources.
So if this is the best you can do, then it does not do what you think it should do.
 
vibise said:
Your side has yet to produce evidence of any wrongdoing.
Assertions without evidence do not count.
Click to expand...
Depends what you mean by evidence. If you cant recognise the biological sex of male by the XY chromosomes as well as the male reproductive organs, then you are unable to see evidence.
 
vibise said:
No. There are plenty of instances in which lying can be illegal. After all, Sarah Palin is suing the NYT, claiming they lied about her.
Click to expand...
Don't think we are in criminal court with Palin. NYTs is charged with libel which involves more than lying.

www.nationalreview.com

Sarah Palin v. the New York Times | National Review

Advantage: Palin
www.nationalreview.com www.nationalreview.com


For a claim to be libelous, it must check three boxes, once it has been established that the claim was published and the subject identified: (1) the claim has to be false, which this one was; (2) it has to be defamatory, which there is no real question this one was: Not only is the claim defamatory on its face, it was obviously meant to be defamatory, in that the entire point of linking Palin to the shooting was to demean and discredit her; and (3) when the claim involves a public figure such as Palin, it has to have been published with “actual malice” or “reckless disregard for the truth.” There is a pretty good case to be made for actual malice: Palin had nothing at all to do with the story, and the only point of dragging her name into it was to damage her reputation and her political prospects.
 
Harry Leggs said:
Don't think we are in criminal court with Palin. NYTs is charged with libel which involves more than lying.

www.nationalreview.com

Sarah Palin v. the New York Times | National Review

Advantage: Palin
www.nationalreview.com www.nationalreview.com


For a claim to be libelous, it must check three boxes, once it has been established that the claim was published and the subject identified: (1) the claim has to be false, which this one was; (2) it has to be defamatory, which there is no real question this one was: Not only is the claim defamatory on its face, it was obviously meant to be defamatory, in that the entire point of linking Palin to the shooting was to demean and discredit her; and (3) when the claim involves a public figure such as Palin, it has to have been published with “actual malice” or “reckless disregard for the truth.” There is a pretty good case to be made for actual malice: Palin had nothing at all to do with the story, and the only point of dragging her name into it was to damage her reputation and her political prospects.
Click to expand...
Out of absolute coincidence, I was in a library in January and read about Governor Palin. She was busting the chops of Big Oil in Alaska and they even loved and respected her. Like 90% approval rating. No other Governor close to her approval ratings. Then in the summer she was added to the mcCain ticket and the flood of lies and false stories exploded.
 
vibise said:
Well if multiple people die after following advice, wouldn't that be evidence that the advice was wrong?
Click to expand...
Rather, would people acknowledge the evidence. Some dont with gender identity so why would they with this?
 
vibise said:
Your accusations have to do with funding issues, so you would have to present information on the grants that were approved, the proposed experiments, the approval process, the involvement of Fauci.
When you get that info together, then you can make accusations.

At the present time, there is no evidence that the virus originated in that lab, or that NIH funded GOF research to generate pathogenic viruses, or that Fauci was the one who is directly responsible for such speculated funding.
Click to expand...
My body my choice. Is society going to drop that killer of thousands?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top