faetal on 16/6/2020 at 17:38
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
Please forgive me if I start to doubt this paper when I do a search for the lead scientist and they have a Hollywood style website:
Please forgive me if I ignore your "wake up sheeple" shtick entirely. If you are focusing on the website (plenty of academics have websites like that - take it from someone who worked in academia) and not the article.
You have all the credibility of a dog wearing a cape, why the fuck should I pay the slightest attention to your opinion?
lowenz on 16/6/2020 at 18:24
Websites can be.....outsourced :p
nbohr1more on 16/6/2020 at 18:43
Quote Posted by lowenz
Websites can be.....outsourced :p
But "WHY"?!?!
"WHY" would someone who works in a very dry mathematical field spend money\time\effort on needless flourish.
"Artsy stuff", "surface level pomp" is usually antithetical to the STEM people. They hate needless clutter. They seek a single equation that explains it all.
Not a web page of touchy-feely end-user promo...
faetal on 16/6/2020 at 19:09
Well, the only explanation is that he was paid off to hide the engineering of coronavirus with a carefully staged, carefully explained examination of viral nucleic acid sequences available to the entire scientific community. His fatal mistake though was to blow some of that dirty cash on a fancy website. It's hubris I tell you. HUBRIS.
nbohr1more on 16/6/2020 at 19:13
Quote Posted by faetal
Well, the only explanation is that he was paid off to hide the engineering of coronavirus with a carefully staged, carefully explained examination of viral nucleic acid sequences available to the entire scientific community. His fatal mistake though was to blow some of that dirty cash on a fancy website. It's hubris I tell you. HUBRIS.
They don't care if it's air-tight.
All the Media are controlled.
All they have to do is have every news outlet deliver the same narrative and call any dissenters "conspiracy theorists".
Sulphur on 16/6/2020 at 19:13
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
"Artsy stuff", "surface level pomp" is usually antithetical to the STEM people. They hate needless clutter. They seek a single equation that explains it all.
I think it's incredibly ironic you've chosen a forum moniker like yours while having little to no understanding of anything, science and people least of all.
nbohr1more on 16/6/2020 at 19:20
Quote Posted by Sulphur
I think it's incredibly ironic you've chosen a forum moniker like yours while having little to no understanding of anything, science and people least of all.
What have I said that contradicts scientific reasoning?
The denizens of this discussion are the anti-science folk who refuse to believe the mathematically verified DKIM signatures in the wikileaks messages.
faetal on 16/6/2020 at 19:25
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
All the Media are controlled.
Except the paper I linked contains a cogent and correct analysis of a publicly available nucleic acid sequence.
You have no credibility, and you haven't been able to raise a single argument against the research paper I linked, other than to make some batshit statements about the production values of the website of the lead researcher.
Also, what Sulphur said. You are a cartoon-grade conspiracy theorist.
It's hilarious that you, a species of ape evolved enough to travel in space and communicate with people all over the world using pulsed electrical signals, find the idea of a virus which can do 2 things at once inherently impossible in nature. How do you expect to be taken seriously, when you're so easily convinced by specious concepts that probably only occur to you after your fifth tube of post bong hit pringles?
Sulphur on 16/6/2020 at 19:27
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
What have I said that contradicts scientific reasoning?
The denizens of this discussion are the anti-science folk who refuse to believe the mathematically verified DKIM signatures in the wikileaks messages.
Let's see - the wilfully stupid generalisation about seeking a single equation to explain 'everything'? The reductionist worldview that people in the sciences aren't interested in art? Holding an opinion that a website with pictures and animated graphs is 'Hollywood level'? That Web 1.0 Geocities templates are the only valid scientific website format? Like literally everything that you've typed out because you're held hostage by, somehow, both a paranoia and a persecution complex that you're blind to?
Get help. I'm not being glib.
nbohr1more on 16/6/2020 at 19:46
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Let's see - the wilfully stupid generalisation about seeking a single equation to explain 'everything'? The reductionist worldview that people in the sciences aren't interested in art? Holding an opinion that a website with pictures and animated graphs is 'Hollywood level'? That Web 1.0 Geocities templates are the only valid scientific website format? Like literally everything that you've typed out because you're held hostage by, somehow, both a paranoia and a persecution complex that you're blind to?
Get help. I'm not being glib.
I have been visiting the websites of scientists since the early 2000's. Whenever a slashdot article has been posted.
I know the normal behavior pattern from 1000's of examples.
How many of these sites have you visited for comparison?