Perhaps framing a get together as a discussion as opposed to a debate? Approach from the point of view that you have questions about spread of covid as well as the mRNA vaccines developed to fight it and you'd like his help addressing those questions? Frame a meeting as more of a collaboration as opposed to an adversarial meet up. Model it after your discussions with Dr. B?
In an earlier day, maybe. But if I see someone who says something wrong at this late date, I'm going to call them out on it. If they act superior, I'm going to state facts and embarrass them. Did you see my response to Albus saying I was unqualified to debate Dr. Offit.. If not, go find it in Dr. Offit's post (in the comments). Albus did not do Dr. Offit any favors. He comes off looking like a lightweight or a "painted monkey" according to another commenter.
Probably, Jack. But he'll suffer if he ignores me. I'll see to that. He will eventually agree to debate someone; maybe not me when he looks me up, but someone.
Not being a doc or scientist, I had always sent Arkmedic's blog posting on the subject to those of my acquaintance who had imbibed the "Wuhan wet market" propaganda -- "How to BLAST your way to the truth about the origins of COVID-19: Using BLAST is easy. I'm going to show you how easy and how to prove that SARS-Cov-2 is man-made"
Thank you, Moonspinner, but my very original proof of 2.20.20 is proof to a certainty of 7.7 x 10 to the 114th power to 1. BUT don't worry, all of my colleagues' lines of reasoning will be loaded in my 6 shooter on debate night.
I never believed for one second that it was spillover. The 1st I heard of the Wuhan flu I had a creepy notion that this was a bioweapon. I’m not a Dr or a scientist. Everything that the “professionals” like Fauci, Offit Birx, Collins, and on down the list all sounded like bull crap. None of the stories lined up. & what had been going on in our country up to that point? The timing of it all had a profound impact on the way the 2020 election rolled out.
To my knowledge, he has never replied to a single comment in his substack, so won't be an acknowledgement of the challenge. I think you should write him to his email, calmly laying out where you disagree, seeing if you can get him to at least engage in a dialectic.
I was pretty surprised how certain he was animal spillover. He is a pretty intelligent person, generally practices proper skepticism, so this was odd. (I could see him leaning towards spillover, but being certain? At this point? With all of the FOIA?)
Understanding what happened takes an immense amount of reading simply to realize how much bullshitting Fauci did and leveraged the media to spread the lie and suppress truth. Dr. Offit is pretty busy guy so I will grant him charity and assume he just simply never took the time to read Viral, the reporting by Katherine Eban, the deep dives by Alex Washburne, the fact checking of Paul Thacker, the senate testimony of Richard Ebright, the contents of the DEFUSE proposal that Drastic leaked, reporting by Shellenberger's "Public" on Fauci's level of deception, etc, etc.
It's a lot of work, and pretty difficult to break those committed to the Saint Fauci hypothesis.
Especially since Dr. Offit already subscribes to the Baric hypothesis that SARS viruses are a brand new threat brought on by climate change and deforestation, rather than just another Coronavirus that has existed with us for 300 million years. Baric doesn't realize that he is only finding them now because this is the first time humanity has the tools to even detect them. To think there was no Covid-85, Covid-62, etc is silly.
Takes a special sort of arrogance to believe that we are so special that Coronaviruses waited 300 million years to mutate into something finally posing a threat, and it just so happened to be right after was created PCR tests and started making chimera versions in labs. What incredible odds!
Alina Chan and the journalist who wrote "Viral" were wrong. They said, "We'll probably never know if it came from an intermediate host in a spillover event or if it leaked from a lab." That's wrong. I had already proved it couldn't have come from zoonotic spillover.
All those people you listed, the "Viral " authors and the others, came long after me. All he had to do was have an open mind and have Fauci, Collins and others call the "lab leak people" conspiracy theorists. Of course neither explanation was correct. It was leaked deliberately. That's why I always used the language, "came from a lad" instead of "leaked from a lab". I think he'll ignore me as Jack predicts but everyone will hear about that too.. By the way, he has people reading every comment. He'll hear about it, maybe research me, and won't respond to it.
Can you point me to your Substack post laying out your lab leak proof (or, lad leak)? IIRC you have a post on it... unless I’m misremembering and i read it in your book?
Maybe edit your post in Offit Substack and add link too, inviting him to comment on it?
These guys say they are sure of something but can't prove anything. They are credentialed but not that smart and want to ride on their position, not their logic. It's the first cousin of arguing from authority except they won't argue because they know they can't prove what they are claiming. Random people also say they knew it came from a lab but they can't prove it either. For one of them to be in a room trying to get policy changed, they have to PROVE it, not just have a feeling that is correct. When people say they KNEW it all along. they should be saying they SUSPECTED it all along. They didn't KNOW it because they couldn't PROVE it. You have to have been able to prove it before someone showed you how.
That's not good enough, Michael. He has to face the fire as do about 100 more from the Narrative side. Their policies kille3d lots and lots of people.. I've proved this a few ways- three, I think- but the one on 2.20.2020 was the first in the world.
Perhaps framing a get together as a discussion as opposed to a debate? Approach from the point of view that you have questions about spread of covid as well as the mRNA vaccines developed to fight it and you'd like his help addressing those questions? Frame a meeting as more of a collaboration as opposed to an adversarial meet up. Model it after your discussions with Dr. B?
In an earlier day, maybe. But if I see someone who says something wrong at this late date, I'm going to call them out on it. If they act superior, I'm going to state facts and embarrass them. Did you see my response to Albus saying I was unqualified to debate Dr. Offit.. If not, go find it in Dr. Offit's post (in the comments). Albus did not do Dr. Offit any favors. He comes off looking like a lightweight or a "painted monkey" according to another commenter.
Yes, I saw the comment by Albus, and responded to it. Obviously, he is wrong. You are more than qualified.
He has too much to loose. So, he'll ignore you. Unfortunately.
Probably, Jack. But he'll suffer if he ignores me. I'll see to that. He will eventually agree to debate someone; maybe not me when he looks me up, but someone.
Offitt has his head ind the sand!
Please repost this!
Hear No, See No, Speak No, evil of covid response or vaccines, this is the strategy applied everywhere for decades or longer.
Off with his head!!
Not being a doc or scientist, I had always sent Arkmedic's blog posting on the subject to those of my acquaintance who had imbibed the "Wuhan wet market" propaganda -- "How to BLAST your way to the truth about the origins of COVID-19: Using BLAST is easy. I'm going to show you how easy and how to prove that SARS-Cov-2 is man-made"
https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/how-to-blast-your-way-to-the-truth
Thank you, Moonspinner, but my very original proof of 2.20.20 is proof to a certainty of 7.7 x 10 to the 114th power to 1. BUT don't worry, all of my colleagues' lines of reasoning will be loaded in my 6 shooter on debate night.
"my 6 shooter on debate night." - where and what time tonight?
Grazyna, it's not tonight. He hasn't agreed yet.
I'll keep my fingers crossed. He speaks the people's language and touches their issues.
For years I was trying to untangle the Trump phenomenon; he is extremely charismatic!
I never believed for one second that it was spillover. The 1st I heard of the Wuhan flu I had a creepy notion that this was a bioweapon. I’m not a Dr or a scientist. Everything that the “professionals” like Fauci, Offit Birx, Collins, and on down the list all sounded like bull crap. None of the stories lined up. & what had been going on in our country up to that point? The timing of it all had a profound impact on the way the 2020 election rolled out.
To my knowledge, he has never replied to a single comment in his substack, so won't be an acknowledgement of the challenge. I think you should write him to his email, calmly laying out where you disagree, seeing if you can get him to at least engage in a dialectic.
I was pretty surprised how certain he was animal spillover. He is a pretty intelligent person, generally practices proper skepticism, so this was odd. (I could see him leaning towards spillover, but being certain? At this point? With all of the FOIA?)
Understanding what happened takes an immense amount of reading simply to realize how much bullshitting Fauci did and leveraged the media to spread the lie and suppress truth. Dr. Offit is pretty busy guy so I will grant him charity and assume he just simply never took the time to read Viral, the reporting by Katherine Eban, the deep dives by Alex Washburne, the fact checking of Paul Thacker, the senate testimony of Richard Ebright, the contents of the DEFUSE proposal that Drastic leaked, reporting by Shellenberger's "Public" on Fauci's level of deception, etc, etc.
It's a lot of work, and pretty difficult to break those committed to the Saint Fauci hypothesis.
Especially since Dr. Offit already subscribes to the Baric hypothesis that SARS viruses are a brand new threat brought on by climate change and deforestation, rather than just another Coronavirus that has existed with us for 300 million years. Baric doesn't realize that he is only finding them now because this is the first time humanity has the tools to even detect them. To think there was no Covid-85, Covid-62, etc is silly.
Takes a special sort of arrogance to believe that we are so special that Coronaviruses waited 300 million years to mutate into something finally posing a threat, and it just so happened to be right after was created PCR tests and started making chimera versions in labs. What incredible odds!
Alina Chan and the journalist who wrote "Viral" were wrong. They said, "We'll probably never know if it came from an intermediate host in a spillover event or if it leaked from a lab." That's wrong. I had already proved it couldn't have come from zoonotic spillover.
All those people you listed, the "Viral " authors and the others, came long after me. All he had to do was have an open mind and have Fauci, Collins and others call the "lab leak people" conspiracy theorists. Of course neither explanation was correct. It was leaked deliberately. That's why I always used the language, "came from a lad" instead of "leaked from a lab". I think he'll ignore me as Jack predicts but everyone will hear about that too.. By the way, he has people reading every comment. He'll hear about it, maybe research me, and won't respond to it.
Can you point me to your Substack post laying out your lab leak proof (or, lad leak)? IIRC you have a post on it... unless I’m misremembering and i read it in your book?
Maybe edit your post in Offit Substack and add link too, inviting him to comment on it?
These guys say they are sure of something but can't prove anything. They are credentialed but not that smart and want to ride on their position, not their logic. It's the first cousin of arguing from authority except they won't argue because they know they can't prove what they are claiming. Random people also say they knew it came from a lab but they can't prove it either. For one of them to be in a room trying to get policy changed, they have to PROVE it, not just have a feeling that is correct. When people say they KNEW it all along. they should be saying they SUSPECTED it all along. They didn't KNOW it because they couldn't PROVE it. You have to have been able to prove it before someone showed you how.
That's not good enough, Michael. He has to face the fire as do about 100 more from the Narrative side. Their policies kille3d lots and lots of people.. I've proved this a few ways- three, I think- but the one on 2.20.2020 was the first in the world.
Both the "animal spillover" and "lab leak" ideas are shiny objects to distract from the reality that there was no novel virus at all.