Posts: 1,238
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2018
11-01-2021, 04:54 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-01-2021, 05:20 AM by AaronM.)
We have reached the agree to disagree portion of this discussion.
The facts have supported my initial statement that vaccinated people are still contagious.
Yes, vaccines are recommended as the preferred method of controlling Covid but the title of this thread has been proven to be correct.
It's a shame that we cannot share opposing viewpoints without resorting to insults.
Anyway, it's past time to stick a fork in this thread.
Posts: 10,231
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
11-01-2021, 08:23 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-01-2021, 08:32 AM by TomK.)
(10-31-2021, 08:19 PM)kander Wrote: What doctors and viral experts are you referring to? And what do patron saints have to do with anything?
Ok
Dr. Robert W. Malone, gene therapy, bio-defense, vaccines and immunology; discoverer of in-vitro and in-vivo RNA transfection and architect of mRNA vaccine platform
^ The guy whos name is on the patent for this technology and has said its not safe. FWIW...
I'm not sure you understand what patented means. Anyone can patent anything. You don't need to show something works in order to patent it, and the USPTO isn't a scientific organization.
(11-01-2021, 04:54 AM)AaronM Wrote: We have reached the agree to disagree portion of this discussion.
The facts have supported my initial statement that vaccinated people are still contagious.
Yes, vaccines are recommended as the preferred method of controlling Covid but the title of this thread has been proven to be correct.
It's a shame that we cannot share opposing viewpoints without resorting to insults.
Anyway, it's past time to stick a fork in this thread.
You are the one that brought the thread back to life with the nonsensical argument that you've been right all this time while arguing against vaccinations.
Posts: 1,085
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2016
"You don't need to show something works in order to patent it"
Please help me to understand your point. Either Dr. Malone's patented technology works or it doesn't. If it works, then Dr. Malone's credibility is good. If it doesn't work, then what does that say about the scientific community that is using this faulty technology across the planet?
It has to be one or the other, doesn't it?
Posts: 14,116
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Either Dr. Malone's patented technology works or it doesn't.
It does seem to be working. Patent status is irrelevant at best.
Posts: 625
Threads: 16
Joined: Jun 2020
(11-01-2021, 06:31 PM)My 2 cents Wrote: "You don't need to show something works in order to patent it"
Please help me to understand your point. Either Dr. Malone's patented technology works or it doesn't. If it works, then Dr. Malone's credibility is good. If it doesn't work, then what does that say about the scientific community that is using this faulty technology across the planet?
It has to be one or the other, doesn't it?
Nope.. there's always a third, a forth, and a fifth way..
As to patents.. any developer that comes up with something unique can get a patent on it. It does not have to work, nor be in production. Just an idea, a few sketches, some money, and bingo you have a patent. It currently cost about 12k to get that ball rolling..
For instance, let's say Apple 'invents' a new way to make a phone call. Some new fangled method to interpret the involuntary twitches of a nose or some such.. so they draw up their idea and file an application for a patent, which gets granted.
Now, because Apple doesn't have any real success with that idea and it never goes to market, that still does not nullify the patent. And then, twenty years later, when Musk comes along and tries to use nose twitches to launch spaceships, well, then Apple can step in and give 'em all sorts of humbug.
A patent is a way to secure an idea.. the idea need not be viable..
As to Dr. Malone's patents, they are not for the covid vaccines. His involvement with mRNA was to show one step, one small step, in a long process, that was years beyond him when it became viable. He does not have any patents associated with the vaccines. And as such any notion that he's a heavy hitter in all this is just so much Facebook silliness.
You do realize "I heard it on FB" is not a good thing, right?
Unfortunately everyone promoting Dr. Malone's silliness never figured that out.. they're to high on their own dopamine to know any better...
If you want to understand how FB junkies have been able to override common sense try reading...
Facebook and Your Brain
The inside dope on Facebook
Here.. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/...your-brain
Posts: 10,231
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
11-02-2021, 05:36 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-02-2021, 05:45 AM by TomK.)
(11-01-2021, 06:31 PM)My 2 cents Wrote: "You don't need to show something works in order to patent it"
Please help me to understand your point. Either Dr. Malone's patented technology works or it doesn't. If it works, then Dr. Malone's credibility is good. If it doesn't work, then what does that say about the scientific community that is using this faulty technology across the planet?
It has to be one or the other, doesn't it?
No, it doesn't. The US Patent Office is not a scientific organization. It allows people to patent their work so it's protected and isn't stolen. It doesn't matter if the idea or design eventually works or fails, the whole idea is to protect the originator who came up with an idea or design. Whether it actually works or not or is successful or not is irrelevant.
As you have probably gathered by now, patents mean little, they certainly aren't based on science, and using the argument that something is patented and therefore is scientifically credible or not is a very weak argument. That's my point.
Posts: 1,085
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2016
A few pages back I asked what or who qualifies as a credible source of information. It seemed like a logical question, but I got nothing. Not a single response.
Although not a direct response to my query, Kander has presented a list of candidates for the Credible Sources Club. As I see it, we are now scrutinizing the first candidate, Dr. Robert Malone, to determine if he is worthy of induction into this elite club.
I found the list of patents rather impressive, but others don’t. Fine, ignore them. They are not needed.
There is no question that Dr. Malone played a significant role in the creation of mRNA technology and has spent the last 30 years or so immersed in the further development of this technology as it applies to vaccines. I believe that his knowledge, experience and expertise in this area more than qualify him as a person worth paying attention to.
I can hope that he’s wrong without minimizing his career.
Posts: 1,447
Threads: 12
Joined: Oct 2016
11-02-2021, 03:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-02-2021, 03:59 PM by Durian Fiend.)
(11-02-2021, 10:43 AM)My 2 cents Wrote: ...I can hope that he’s wrong without minimizing his career. Apparently Dr. Malone got Covid, was suffering from long haul symptoms and decided to see if vaccine would alleviate them. No such luck
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ic/619734/
Posts: 1,085
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2016
(11-02-2021, 03:58 PM)Durian Fiend Wrote: (11-02-2021, 10:43 AM)My 2 cents Wrote: ...I can hope that he’s wrong without minimizing his career. Apparently Dr. Malone got Covid, was suffering from long haul symptoms and decided to see if vaccine would alleviate them. No such luck
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ic/619734/
As I've said before, I don't do Facebook. Never have, never will. But some people do get their information there.
From the article:
"The Atlantic’s COVID-19 coverage is supported by grants from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation."
In case you were wondering...
Chan Zuckerberg Initiative
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is an organization established and owned by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan with an investment of 99 percent of the couple's wealth from their Facebook shares over their lifetime. The CZI is set up as a limited liability company and is an example of philanthrocapitalism. Wikipedia
Type:LLC
Founded  ecember 1, 2015
Founders  riscilla Chan, Mark Zuckerberg
Posts: 1,238
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2018
The days of Facebook are numbered.
According to recent survey data(no links or sources provided here), the demographic of users is getting older and the youth perceive Facebook to be a place where the Boomers are.
Zuckerberg would be well served to cash out now rather than later. Lord knows Hawaiian land isn't getting any cheaper.
|
