NIH Admits To Funding Gain-Of-Function Research In Wuhan Lab

[danielpalos]

So ClaireH:


Just curious. Does it bother you at all that Rigby, in essence, is calling Daniel a liar here?

Ad hominems are what right-wingers are best at not any form of "gospel Truth".

 

[ClaireH]

So ClaireH:


Just curious. Does it bother you at all that Rigby, in essence, is calling Daniel a liar here?

GN- are you making the claim that political posters are neutral here? I think that’s almost impossible with respect to politics and I have biases. I’ve seen a few USMB members who could run circles around the majority of us with staying neutral. Alas, I do not claim to be one of these exceptional posters.

Humans either develop loyalties or stay on an island. There are good loyalties and bad loyalties, good “islands” and bad ones.

With all of the personal back-and-forth that goes on in most every political thread, I initially did better staying out of it, but “loyalties” to defend are kicking in lately.

Regarding your question about whether it bothers me that X poster calls Y poster a liar, I have no idea of anyone’s history with another poster on here. When I used to visit various political chat rooms where hostile exchanges run amuck, unless a person knows the full history it was just better to stay out of it. I made the mistake one time of defending a person because I jumped in the middle and it ended up that I was defending some jerk.

I always assume there’s been previous conversations and I have no business nor interest to take a side in that respect.

 

[Grumblenuts]

GN- are you making the claim that political posters are neutral here? I think that’s almost impossible with respect to politics and I have biases. I’ve seen a few USMB members who could run circles around the majority of us with staying neutral. Alas, I do not claim to be one of these exceptional posters.

Humans either develop loyalties or stay on an island. There are good loyalties and bad loyalties, good “islands” and bad ones.

With all of the personal back-and-forth that goes on in most every political thread, I initially did better staying out of it, but “loyalties” to defend are kicking in lately.

Regarding your question about whether it bothers me that X poster calls Y poster a liar, I have no idea of anyone’s history with another poster on here. When I used to visit various political chat rooms where hostile exchanges run amuck, unless a person knows the full history it was just better to stay out of it. I made the mistake one time of defending a person because I jumped in the middle and it ended up that I was defending some jerk.

I always assume there’s been previous conversations and I have no business nor interest to take a side in that respect.

Fascinating.. Thanks.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

RACISTS--EVERYWHERE

Are we just doing bits here now?

 

[otto105]

Perfectly fine English, you just have your Libtard filter on.

Sorry, don't do parler shitstain.

 

[MarathonMike]

Sorry, don't do parler shitstain.

Another paid shill, revealing his vile self.

 

[the other mike]

This is good.

 

[MarathonMike]

otto105 Do you get paid by the post, by the word?

 

[Grumblenuts]

So the right is suddenly besties with PETA?

 

[the other mike]

So the right is suddenly besties with PETA?

I didn't realize dog torture would be a right/left issue. Have you ever heard of right and wrong ?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Have you heard of Newsmax by any chance?

 

[ClaireH]

Fascinating.. Thanks.

If you prefer text speak replies to questions, I’d suggest you take me off your list. Lol

 

[otto105]

otto105 Do you get paid by the post, by the word?

Reagan sold arms to terrorists and negotiated with them.

He also wants you to smoke a Chesterfield while holding a monkey.

 

[ClaireH]

Well, well, well. It seems that NIH been around this block before. For once in my life I’m speechless. I am losing faith in humanity but fighting against generalizing these deceitful coverups of overlords in charge to focus on the exact players.

Was NIH-funded work on MERS virus in China too risky? Science examines the controversy​

EcoHealth Alliance defends hotly debated research that altered deadly coronavirus​

Bye-bye Fauci. The timing fits perfectly well to resign (prior to being ousted) with the recent retirement of NIH’s director. It’s getting interesting to see their blame dance with EcoHealth-NIH grantee. If NIH heads believe the public will let this go, they are mistaken.

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

 

[Grumblenuts]

Astoundingly consistent, how mismatched your links and descriptions wind up being. One could almost set their broken clock by it.

 

[danielpalos]

...does it matter? It could have happened through basic research due to the transmissibility of the pathogen.

 

[ClaireH]

Astoundingly consistent, how mismatched your links and descriptions wind up being. One could almost set their broken clock by it.

Hard to confirm but in case your astute observation was in reference to my post, try thinking outside the box, or, continue to look only where you’ve already been.
Your claim is invalid anyway, regardless of which post you’re referring. The OP -

NIH Admits To Funding Gain-Of-Function Research In Wuhan Lab.​

I provided documented hx of this same scenario: NIH claiming to be in the dark of the same grantee’s -EcoHealth’s actions. The fact that this has happened before, with these specific players, means it should have NEVER happened again. The previous “intentional incident” of creating a novel virus from bats, happened right before the major outbreak of MERS. This is new information to me, but possibly you’re already aware of it and have financial concerns. Money does “talk” to corruptive types unfortunately.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Regarding your question about whether it bothers me that X poster calls Y poster a liar, I have no idea of anyone’s history with another poster on here. When I used to visit various political chat rooms where hostile exchanges run amuck, unless a person knows the full history it was just better to stay out of it. I made the mistake one time of defending a person because I jumped in the middle and it ended up that I was defending some jerk.

I always assume there’s been previous conversations and I have no business nor interest to take a side in that respect.

Rather than let this slide any longer.. Sunday, same thread:

If you are calling me a liar you are the one who is pathetic for jumping to conclusions. I never intentionally lie on the board or otherwise.

You backhandedly called me a liar there and have yet to even acknowledge doing so. When you get around to admitting in some fashion that you screwed up there I might consider responding to your more current inquiry.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Better yet:

The only time I react is when someone lies about me personally, as you did.

 

[ClaireH]

Rather than let this slide any longer.. Sunday, same thread:

You backhandedly called me a liar there and have yet to even acknowledge doing so. When you get around to admitting in some fashion that you screwed up there I might consider responding to your more current inquiry.

Backhand? Not likely. I hate tennis. I didn’t call you a liar and would admit it if I did. You read into my words, so maybe there is hope you see outside of the box you’ve chosen. I added that last part, “you’ve chosen”, to clarify that I am not indicating you’re mentally lacking. Your choice completely to remain where you are for all time.