It is pretty comprehensive. One might almost say the good doctor was "triggered" (and not without ample justification!).
It's been rather comical....I got into a Twitter argument with a defender of the Pandemic Panic Narrative over Dr. Blaylock's article, and she kept telling me I should be verifying his claims instead of challenging her derogation thereof.
Of course, anyone who's read just a smidgen of my COVID articles here knows that a fair number of his claims are topics I've already researched! It's not exactly "confirmation bias" when someone else's factual assertions dovetail with your own independent research and analysis.
Read a good chunk of this in the wee hours this morning. It is a nice compendium of what has been, from the beginning, the Covid circus
It is pretty comprehensive. One might almost say the good doctor was "triggered" (and not without ample justification!).
It's been rather comical....I got into a Twitter argument with a defender of the Pandemic Panic Narrative over Dr. Blaylock's article, and she kept telling me I should be verifying his claims instead of challenging her derogation thereof.
https://twitter.com/allfacts_matter/status/1527146653882454017?s=20&t=EKDbEv_hwt2ffjLWKpEeeQ
Of course, anyone who's read just a smidgen of my COVID articles here knows that a fair number of his claims are topics I've already researched! It's not exactly "confirmation bias" when someone else's factual assertions dovetail with your own independent research and analysis.
That's certainly my take on it