Auto emissions didn't stop the coronavirus from spreading, as a demonstrable fact. I literally have no idea what you're trying to say.Auto emissions, which would have stopped the corona virus from ever spreading, also killed off its natural enemy.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Why don't you like the idea that there's a sudden outbreak due to a mutation?What I don't like about the mutation theory is that it assumes that mutation into a deadly form is the answer to why there is a sudden outbreak.
Again, I haven no idea what you're trying to say. It sounds like a word game -- like "assuming something doesn't ever die, then it is immortal." Ummm, OK.Second, it makes a virus immortal, assuming that there will be surviving mutations.
I'm going to go ahead and assume you meant "organism," or this conversation just got really weird. But, yes, there are limits on how natural selection works. The changes need to be done in small steps, since only a handful of genetic variations are likely to occur at any time, and those will only modify an organism slightly. Andin order for that change to stick around, it needs to confer some benefit, or at least to be neutral, from the perspective of passing along those genes. So, if the Coronavirus needs to develop the ability to sing in order to survive, that's not going to happen. But what we're talking about here is entirely in line with our understanding of how viruses change over time. We know it's similar to earlier coronaviruses. We have a basic understanding of the small changes that morphed it into this novel Coronavirus, and we have a basic understanding of the changes that have given rise to the variants.So there is a limit to what an orgasm can mutate into.
Says a souless creature, whose posting style is very familiar to us in here.I already acknowledged your defeat. No need to keep calling attention to it. Your disgrace is complete.
For or against vaccine mandates?COVID is the disease, and the mRNA vaccines have proven to be a remarkably safe and effective way to help control that disease. They first proved their safety in clinical trials. That data was convincing enough to shape the decisions of pretty much every scientifically advanced nation, leading to prompt approval.
They have since confirmed that initial finding of safety in the most massive vaccine roll-out in history, in which tracking of recipients confirms no statistically significant increase in serious health problems from the vaccines.
Of course, there are those who, for strictly partisan political reason, continue to want to push irrational fear about the vaccines. And maybe if it had just been one regulator under one administration in one country that had approved, they wouldn't sound like crazy people when they mumble incoherently about regulatory capture. But we're talking about initial authorization by the Trump FDA, further approval by the Biden FDA, and the same findings in literally scores of regulatory bodies all around the world, each with experts independently looking at the data and coming to the same conclusion.
I would think correctly stated it does not control per se.. it instead affords resistance... The virus carries on seeking out another less resistant host....COVID is the disease, and the mRNA vaccines have proven to be a remarkably safe and effective way to help control that disease. They first proved their safety in clinical trials. That data was convincing enough to shape the decisions of pretty much every scientifically advanced nation, leading to prompt approval.
They have since confirmed that initial finding of safety in the most massive vaccine roll-out in history, in which tracking of recipients confirms no statistically significant increase in serious health problems from the vaccines.
Of course, there are those who, for strictly partisan political reason, continue to want to push irrational fear about the vaccines. And maybe if it had just been one regulator under one administration in one country that had approved, they wouldn't sound like crazy people when they mumble incoherently about regulatory capture. But we're talking about initial authorization by the Trump FDA, further approval by the Biden FDA, and the same findings in literally scores of regulatory bodies all around the world, each with experts independently looking at the data and coming to the same conclusion.
Who is us. If it's who you think, let him show himself ...he would be most welcome. Otherwise, let's not attack our new friend unnecessarily.Says a souless creature, whose posting style is very familiar to us in here.
Defeat indeed, disgrace, my foot - I gave you one link, the words of which, you twisted into the opposite of itself. You twisted it like the pro you are,
You showed your hand too quickly but then, was patience ever possessed by you? You nasty peice of work.
Alzheimer's has been around throughout human history. It kills around120,000 people in the US per year, year in and year out. So, just since Ronald Reagan died, about two million other Americans have died of Alzheimer's. That's a whole lot more than the number who have died of COVID so far, even though COVID is killing at a much faster rate. So we would naturally expect to know more famous people killed by Alzheimer's than COVID.Another clue that it is a hoax is that nobody known by most Americans died from it, whereas Alzheimer's must be real because of Reagan, Heston, Campbell, et al.
As you know, you pointed to a crazy lay person's work to try to support your anti-vax ideology. I then quoted directly from her work to point out how silly it was, at which point you recognized your defeat and humiliation and refused to engage further on the substance.Says a souless creature, whose posting style is very familiar to us in here.
Defeat indeed, disgrace, my foot - I gave you one link, the words of which, you twisted into the opposite of itself. You twisted it like the pro you are,
You showed your hand too quickly but then, was patience ever possessed by you? You nasty peice of work.
Depends on the context.For or against vaccine mandates?
CovidDepends on the context.
I didn't link you to the work of a lay person at all, wtf is that about? You didn't quote from her book you twisted some of her meaning and ridiculed your twisted version as though it were her meaning - it wasn't. And if your reaction had been different we could have talked about -As you know, you pointed to a crazy lay person's work to try to support your anti-vax ideology. I then quoted directly from her work to point out how silly it was, at which point you recognized your defeat and humiliation and refused to engage further on the substance.
New freind!!!! Fine freind = post 262!Who is us. If it's who you think, let him show himself ...he would be most welcome. Otherwise, let's not attack our new friend unnecessarily.
What exactly is post 262 supposed to illustrate, other than a discounting of the supposed science of the author in question?New freind!!!! Fine freind = post 262!
There is no such thing as a virus - it is a myth.I would think correctly stated it does not control per se.. it instead affords resistance... The virus carries on seeking out another less resistant host....
Splendid.There is no such thing as a virus - it is a myth.
Are the Russian paying you?There is no such thing as a virus - it is a myth.
Splendid.
There's no such thing as great Britain..it's a myth.
Ooh..this is fun
Change the record ObombacareForever, old bean,Are the Russian paying you?
Or do you just post misinformation for free?
If you are you are posting it for free, I would contact your local Russian embassy and look at how to get paid for the bullshit.
My statement is a staring point. Yours is provably false.
Not heard of Antoine Bechamp then?Mine is absurdity.... mirroring your own.