Recycling the 2, 3 and 4 year old ad-hominem trash from your FactCheck archive?
A desperate last resort in trying to counter the irrefutable evidence that the Covid-19 response was a disaster, and that specifically the Covid-19 gen therapies (the experimental jabs) were neither safe nor effective, and even more important > not necessary.
Yes! I did change my line of thought as I read through the references.
I find the 'data' concerned with covid and the jabs so un-scientific. Computer modeling. Estimation. Visualisation etc. We also know that the causes of death during the covid era - in the UK at least - were falsified to reinforce the virus narrative.
What I am interested in personally is; 'Is it True'. Some of the references in the piece are utter nonsense. As I said; especially the NIH one particularly. If rubbish can be referenced, it puts the integrity of the work in jeopardy.
Just a point of curiosity... Are the POPULAR CONTRIBUTORS ranked solely on post count, or does their emoji count (given and received) factor in at all?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now