”The” = definite article

”the TRUTH”

A few days ago I listened to a LONG interview on Joe Rogans podcast with Dr. Robert Malone. It was very interesting. I was thinking of spreading the YouYube link. When I tried to find it on YouTube it was apparently already gone.

At the top of this search was part of the interview put up by another person (20 minutes, instead of over 3h for the original. I’ve found the original om Rumble https://rumble.com/vrtdku-joe-rogan-jre-1757-robert-malone-covid.html ). I would be surprised if that short clip doesn’t also disappear very soon. (It was there 2022-1-8 12.00 Swedish time) (you can check here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h80w8DYBKY0&t=23s )

I looked at the number 2 in the search list. The presenter, ”Debunk the Funk with Dr. Wilson” has an Afro hair that is quite impressive! He criticises Malone very much. The good thing about that YT post is that it has MANY links to the sources for what he says. So many sources that he had to continue the link list in the comments section.

In spite of that, some of his content, that relies on beliefs I’ve already researched and found distortingly unnuanced, I thought I should check some other things he claimed.

Before I give a more full tour of todays ”rabbit hole”, I should make sure I cover the title of this (my) post ” ’The’ = definite article”.

Is ”the” important?

In ”Dr. Wilson”s critic of Dr Malone he says that Dr. Malone calls himself the inventor of mRNA vaccine. ”THE”, especially when used in singular, is giving the impression that Malone is saying that HE is ”the only” inventor, otherwise he would say ”one of the”.

When I checked the critics links under history of the mRNA vaccines, the first article started with ”In late 1987, Robert Malone performed a landmark experiment.” It then had a long trail of development and disputes leading up to the present vaccines. Wikipedia has also the ”landmark” marking of his early work.

(If you dig into the ”history” page behind the wikipedia page you can see an EXTREMELY dense correspondence. For example why ” he has been criticized for promoting misinformation ” is there, instead of ” he has been criticized for promoting alleged misinformation ”)

"inventor of mRNA & RNA vaccines

I have always found Dr. Malone to be a very soft-spoken and don’t remember him calling himself ”THE inventor”. He was accused of saying that on LinkedIn and on his website. I tried looking at LinkedIn, but he seems to have been removed there also. To the right is the presentation that comes up at his substack blog ”Who is Robert Malone”. It doesn’t say ”THE inventor”

I have been sensitized to the careless use of ”the” in recent times. There are many places where the is used manipulatively like in ”Follow the science!” as though there is ONE DEFINITE TRUTH that is already KNOWN by SCIENCE. This is quite antithetical to science as a method to step by step get hopefully closer and closer to material truth. An essential step is to critically question things that include things that OTHER scientists have presented. So questioning something that other scientists have presented in not anti-science! It is the essence of science itself!

More ”Debunking the debunker”

The debunker, Dr Wilson, had some other things I thought I would check up. Dr Malone had said in the interview that the home care Covid packages used in U(t)tar Pradesh, India had an undisclosed content. I heard Malone say that.

What did the ”debunker” claim?

1) ”Malone’s claims about secrecy of the medication packets handed out in Uttar Pradesh are false:”
2) ”Uttar Pradesh lowered COVID counts using lockdowns, testing, and a large vaccination campaign:” (so not really Ivermectin)

What do the debunkers sources say?

1) The Indian source DOES say that the contents were disclosed and was upset by Malones ideas that maybe the US had pressured India to hide that.
But this source also gives a quite glowing presentation of how well the Ivermectin had worked. For example ”the large-scale therapeutic use of Ivermectin helped to maintain a low Covid-19 positivity rate and a low fatality rate as compared to the other Indian States. ” which comes in conflict with 2) in the debunkers content.
2) The (non Indian) source says ”Now, there’s not a great deal of publicly-available information about what was in these medical kits, but a month later the chief medical officer of the state did say that in a different program for children, the medical kits given out contained ivermectin, so we can probably assume some of the ones given out earlier did as well.” which seems to means at least that the contents were, at that point, not ”known” . This source also says ”Even if we were to assume that ivermectin is a perfect prophylactic against Covid-19 — something that is almost certainly not true” which comes in conflict with 1) in the debunkers content.

So much for the over-simplicity, I’d say concious manipulation, of ”the science”. Anyone, pro- or anti- anything, will be more likely to see, find, spread the things that agree with what they already believe.

See the original Dr. Malone interview

I recommend checking out the long interview. (Warning it contains advertisements! Black rifle coffee, Square space, and more) https://rumble.com/vrtdku-joe-rogan-jre-1757-robert-malone-covid.html

Lämna ett svar

Din e-postadress kommer inte publiceras.