Dr Robert Malone interview on Joe Rogan podcast

[Horta]

On 1/13/2022 at 2:15 AM, Liquid Gardens said:

When I google that I get very little, and 'Mass Formation' does not have a wiki entry which is suspicious.  When I entered the term in wiki I was taken to an article on a century-old book by Freud which doesn't exactly make this sound recent. 

His work takes in some older ideas and observations on crowd/population psychology, that some may be obscure probably shouldn't matter. He mentions some of them. The effect is well known and documented, whether you accept his terminology and explanation for it or not, or whether you feel that the present situation qualifies would be a different matter. Critique of what he is claiming would probably be a better way to go rather than delegitimizing the term, if that's the intention.

He also draws heavily on the mass psychology involving totalitarianism. It might not be as relevant as some are making it out to be, but the mass censorship and propaganda campaign being waged at the moment would be unparalleled in world history IMO, and by "othering" a certain group of society, we are repeating many of the same mistakes.

If you want some recommended literature or are curious about the history of the term, why not email him? Seriously. I'd like to hear his answers. Seems a better idea than a quick wiki search.

Mattias.Desmet@UGent.be

Quote

From what you've seen/read what is the difference between people believing things out of supposed semi 'hypnosis' and people believing experts because of their expertise for example? 

Semi hypnosis is probably not the best description. It's similar to hypnosis in that attention is so narrowly focused on a narrative, in a similar way that to fall under hypnosis generally requires the mind to have a type of focus on something. 

His claim is that "Mass Formation" happens almost entirely at the subliminal level if certain conditions are met and a narrative captures the focus enough. In that case the "experts" themselves are equally affected, which I think is what is obviously happening so I doubt the above is relevant. The ones that aren't affected have already been shut down by the "ministry of truth" and smeared with propaganda or are keeping quiet as they've seen what happens.

I know of one professor whose group developed a vaccine that has passed stage 3 trials and could easily be implemented but his own countries "experts" and politicians have completely ignored him. It's not that they have found anything wrong with it, it's that they haven't even considered it. It uses a slightly different technology which looks like being far safer. He has been told from insiders that to even have it considered will require going through a lobby group and a sizeable donation to a political party (not that there's any corruption lol).

His biggest problem is that he also strongly supports early treatments and has doubts about vaccinating everyone. Last I heard he was going to be sacked from his uni position for taking his own vaccine instead of a state mandated one. Seems he is being gradually relegated to that list of "anti vaxxers", some of whom have dedicated whole careers to vaccinology, or in fields of science that makes them among the most vaccinated people on the planet (and often vaccinated for covid). Has a term ever been more unrealistically weaponized?

The narrative has become the most important thing. It will be interesting to see how further ridiculous it gets as it evolves.

Quote

I disagree with you a tiny bit with your mention of 'the' narrative with covid, there's actually a lot of narratives and I agree some of them are definitely far out.  But I don't think all or even most people who believe those narratives are 'hypnotized'; not all people base their opinions on facts and evidence for example, but that doesn't then mean they are just going along with the masses.  It seems like we instead need to tease out ideas or actions that a person would not normally do in the situation and look for an inconsistency, but unfortunately something as huge and thankfully novel as the pandemic does not give us much basis to say, 'in this situation if you weren't under the effects of 'Mass Formation' you wouldn't think/do that'.  Nobody has been in this situation before to be able to have a comparison.

I'm talking about the "official" narrative. The one that is being driven by the media and bureaucrats following the "best science". It is constantly evolving and is leading to some very strange actions as the "experts" try to cope with the dissonance. It is curious that so many people are not only wholly uncritical of it, but don't even have the most basic intellectual curiosity about it (especially the academics). If something doesn't fit the narrative, it is attacked. It's fascinating, if unfortunate.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Horta

[ChrLzs]

ravenhawk, paging ravenhawk........ @RavenHawk, where art thou?  Please answer the question below.

On 1/11/2022 at 3:52 PM, ChrLzs said:

Ravenhawk, can you please be specific - which was the most heinous lie that Fauci perpetrated?

Be specific - here's your chance to show your knowledge.

It isn't nice to accuse someone of lying, and then not be prepared to back it up.

[+Liquid Gardens]

9 hours ago, Horta said:

The effect is well known and documented, whether you accept his terminology and explanation for it or not, or whether you feel that the present situation qualifies would be a different matter. Critique of what he is claiming would probably be a better way to go rather than delegitimizing the term, if that's the intention.

That's the thing, what effect is well known and documented?  As we see it's not 'Mass Formation'; if Mass Formation is equivalent to some other concept, then why not use that label?

10 hours ago, Horta said:

If you want some recommended literature or are curious about the history of the term, why not email him? Seriously. I'd like to hear his answers. Seems a better idea than a quick wiki search.

Nah, I'll wait for this to be picked up by some more experts.  I'd be curious to hear answers about what I posted earlier in #83: 

"The description of “mass formation psychosis” offered by Malone resembles discredited concepts, such as “mob mentality” and “group mind,” according to John Drury, a social psychologist at the University of Sussex in the U.K. who studies collective behavior. The ideas suggest that “when people form part of a psychological crowd they lose their identities and their self-control; they become suggestible, and primitive instinctive impulses predominate,” he said in an email.

That notion has been discredited by decades of research on crowd behavior, Drury said. “No respectable psychologist agrees with these ideas now,” he said."

I'd be interested to know the difference between mob mentality/group mind, terms I have heard before, and Mass Formation.

10 hours ago, Horta said:

In that case the "experts" themselves are equally affected, which I think is what is obviously happening so I doubt the above is relevant. The ones that aren't affected have already been shut down by the "ministry of truth" and smeared with propaganda or are keeping quiet as they've seen what happens.

I seriously do not know what you are referring to here.  I'm wondering at this point that the idea of Mass Formation is relying on first accepting the above stuff about propaganda, which I think is way too vague, and is therefore offering an explanation for it.  I'll admit this comes across as a little too tidy and convenient too, it drifts too close to 'experts who disagree with me are affected by Mass Formation, experts I agree with are being shut down by the ministry of truth'.

10 hours ago, Horta said:

Has a term ever been more unrealistically weaponized?

'BLM' comes to mind in my country.

10 hours ago, Horta said:

I'm talking about the "official" narrative. The one that is being driven by the media and bureaucrats following the "best science". It is constantly evolving and is leading to some very strange actions as the "experts" try to cope with the dissonance. It is curious that so many people are not only wholly uncritical of it, but don't even have the most basic intellectual curiosity about it (especially the academics). If something doesn't fit the narrative, it is attacked. It's fascinating, if unfortunate.

Which 'official' narrative, I don't think there's just 'one'.  There's lots of them being driven by different media and different bureaucrats.  What specifically are people uncritical of that they should be?  Things probably get attacked simply because of the narrative, but things also get attacked because they are unsupported and/or false, and in the case of some anti-vax stuff potentially dangerous.  

[+Liquid Gardens]

More 'science' from Prof. (not Dr) Desmet:

"Materialistic science starts from the idea that the world consists of material particles. Yet precisely this science reveals that matter is a form of consciousness"

https://dailysceptic.org/interview-with-mattias-desmet-professor-of-clinical-psychology/

'Materialistic science' (also known as 'science') has determined that matter is a form of consciousness now? 

Edited January 14, 2022 by Liquid Gardens

[RavenHawk]

On 1/9/2022 at 2:12 PM, Nuclear Wessel said:

I look forward to your findings being in Nature.

I’m not part of that clique, so you’ll just have to wait.  But I am, in this forum.

 

Quote

I am very curious as to how you reached that conclusion, being that it is not unheard of for an "infectious dose" (the amount of virion required for an infection to occur within the host) to be in the range of hundreds to potentially thousands of virions (as is the case with the MERS virus).

The “infectious dose” is just a mathematical probability.  Yes, that threshold can be hundreds or thousands to assure infection.  But it only takes one to actually infect (not likely but possible).  There are thousands of free-floating molecules buzzing around our heads at any given time.  Yes, in a “dose” you will probably see many more than one infecting at a time.  But spittle has to be targeted at a membrane and it has to also land on a membrane, whereas, in gaseous form (i.e. smoke), floating molecules (virions) will engulf the membrane without the need for targeting.  There are far more molecules of covid floating around in the air than spittle.  The heavy aerosol falls out to the ground, whereas the light aerosol will stay floating indefinitely (eventually succumbing to gravity).  That’s all I’m getting at.  It’s all about delivery.  Gas is far more effective to clear out a trench than gunfire. 

As an afterthought, I assume that you’ve seen dust particles floating in a room, in the sunlight?  The room is just filled with suspended particles.  All that stuff floats around your head and there are even a multitude more invisible particles floating around too.  There are so many that a particle of spittle would get lost.

 

Quote

This is why I asked you in a previous response as to what you meant by "it only takes one",

I haven’t responded to it because I just got to it, so I’ll respond here.  Yes, in this post, molecule and virion are virtually the same.  Unless you want to make a distinction to distract??

 

Quote

because a droplet can carry many thousands of virions, depending on the size... which is why the larger, non-aerosolized droplets are so concerning (as they house a much higher concentration of the virii).

How many hundreds of billions if not trillions of free-floating molecules are in a single breath?  That out numbers anything found in a droplet.  What is the percentage of the population that spits out the larger droplets directly at someone’s face (within a foot or two)?  That is not usual behavior.

 

Quote

You claim to support science yet you make absolutely risible claims like this.

And yet, you haven’t been able to counter my claim.  You can’t laugh it off.  You can try.

[RavenHawk]

On 1/9/2022 at 2:31 PM, Tatetopa said:

It doesn't matter how beautiful your theories on aerosol droplet size are or how well you explain them.  The only thing that  matters is the data.  

And data is what is used to explain it.  The data in this case is as simple as visual inspection.  One doesn’t have to spend a lifetime trying to understand the data nor the results.

 

Quote

Is there a statistical difference in transmission rates of those who wear masks and those who do not? 

Statistically, I would say yes, but actually and practically, I’d say no.  The difference is immaterial.  It’s the difference between 100 billion and 90 billion.

 

Quote

Is there a statistical difference in hospitalizations and deaths of those who are vaccinated and those who are not? 

It all depends on the current definition of “vaxed” (fully vaccinated) is.  With every new booster, anyone who is not up to date on all their shots are considered not vaxed.  With every new booster, the number of vaccinated starts all over to zero.  And more and more people will be rejecting additional shots as they’ve experienced adverse effects or knows someone who has, including death.   At some point, the number of vaxed being hospitalized will surpass the number of unvaccinated.  More and more of the unvaxed are acquiring natural immunity.  That may not prevent them from catching it again (omicron), but for the majority, they won’t see the inside of a hospital.  For those that are vaccinated, we will see an increase in deaths from other diseases, because their immune systems have been compromised.  You’ve noticed how unexpected deaths are on the rise?  Covid doesn’t kill that way.

 

Quote

The whole point  of masks and vaccinations is results vs. control groups that do not do one or both. There seems to be data floating around to answer that experiment.  

The data is skewed.  So you can’t determine results.  They are not asking the right questions and ignoring half the data.  How many vaccinated have been saved (from death) and how many have died from the vaccine?  In a few years, we will start to see the results from the long-term safety data and that will add a new sad chapter in all of this.

 

[RavenHawk]

14 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

ravenhawk, paging ravenhawk........ @RavenHawk, where art thou?  Please answer the question below.

It isn't nice to accuse someone of lying, and then not be prepared to back it up.

I hadn’t gotten to it yet.  It was coming up.  I do other things besides making sure I respond to your queries.  Look, if I have not responded to you, it’s because I missed it or haven’t read it yet.  Not because I can’t answer it.  All you need to do is to bring it up again.  Now there is a chance that I have already answered it, but not in this case.

 

Have you not been paying attention to current events?  Do you not know the link between Fauci and Peter Daszak?  And the ties with WHO and Wuhan?  This reveals the role that the Globalists have right now.  This shows the real existential threat to mankind.  Fauci has a financial interest in Moderna.  Yes, I know that the usual suspects have been trying to discredit that, but because it is the usual suspects that are covering for him, the truth of it is pretty established.  If you don’t agree then how come Fauci has been squashing usage of Regeneron, Hydroxychloroquine, & Ivermectin?  And those last two have been on the list of essential drugs??  The reason is in the definition of what these vaccines are.  They are experimental drugs with an EUA (Emergency Use Authorization).  A drug gets that status if there are no other treatments available.  There are plenty of studies supporting those other drugs and if one was serious about public health, they would pursue them.  We could have been through this pLandemic a long time ago.  Because he is not, is very suspicious.  If he is all about the science, it should be more than just trying to shutdown the argument.  He is our Dr Mengele.  Directing the Crisis step in Ideological Subversion.

 

I think it was Tucker Carlson that broke the story first, then Rand Paul put Fauci’s feet to the fire.  I enjoy watching the little man dance.  Robert Kennedy Jr. has the book “The Real Anthony Fauci” out.  I have not read it yet but from what I am hearing, it is devastating.  The leprechaun is nothing but a corrupt bureaucrat.  When the tribunals begin, he will be at the top of the docket.

 

[ChrLzs]

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

I hadn’t gotten to it yet.  It was coming up.  I do other things besides making sure I respond to your queries.  Look, if I have not responded to you, it’s because I missed it or haven’t read it yet.  Not because I can’t answer it.  All you need to do is to bring it up again.  Now there is a chance that I have already answered it, but not in this case.

Gee thanks for all that needless waffle.  Answer the question.  QUOTE the biggest Fauci lie.

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Have you not been paying attention to current events?

Here we go, here's another attempt to dodge the question.  And next, s/he will throw poo at the fan and hope that nobody notices that @RavenHawk still didn't answer the question....

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Do you not know the link between ...

ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

And the ties with WHO and Wuhan?

No, quote the LIE, not the ties.

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

This reveals the role ..

For cryin' out loud... more waffle .. ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

This shows the real existential threat ...

Yada yada.  ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

If you don’t agree then how come ...

I'm losing the will to live.  If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny.  How much dodging can one person do?

ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

There are plenty of studies ...

Snore.....

ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Because he is not, is very suspicious.  If he is all about the science, it should be more than ...

raven's arms must be so tired from all the handwaving...

17 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

I think it was Tucker Carlson

No, it was Fauci we are talking about.  Remember?  Fauci.  You know, the one you accused of lying and that I asked you to QUOTE the lie.

 

You haven't done that.  Not even close.  So, we have to assume YOU lied about the lie.

[+Nuclear Wessel]

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

The “infectious dose” is just a mathematical probability.  Yes, that threshold can be hundreds or thousands to assure infection.  But it only takes one to actually infect (not likely but possible).

I look forward to your supporting evidence on this claim. With certain viruses an infective dose of one virion can be one (i.e. the virus that causes smallpox), but there is no supporting evidence that it only takes one virion to infect a host with SARS CoV 2.

Your rebuttal is noted, but dismissed on the basis of being unsubstantiated. 

[+and-then]

56 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

If you don’t agree then how come Fauci has been squashing usage of Regeneron, Hydroxychloroquine, & Ivermectin?  And those last two have been on the list of essential drugs??  The reason is in the definition of what these vaccines are.  They are experimental drugs with an EUA (Emergency Use Authorization).  A drug gets that status if there are no other treatments available.  There are plenty of studies supporting those other drugs and if one was serious about public health, they would pursue them.

I've come to the conclusion that many who spent 4 years in severe distress over an outsider who became president and then had the entire media go after every word he uttered to twist and malign as badly as possible, would now literally follow any narrative that was against him right up to the gates of hell and beyond.  To my mind, at least, THAT level of insane, baseless anger and hate is far more destructive than SARS-COV-2 ever could be.  I don't think we'll be seeing any vaccines for it either.

[+and-then]

45 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

So, we have to assume YOU lied about the lie.

We?  You got a mouse in your pocket?  Your technique for obfuscation is tired and isn't accepted by any but those who already agree with you on everything.  

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rand-paul-wuhan-documents-fauci-lied

Oh, and spare me the eye-roll on the source.  That game of one side getting to decide which sources are "credible" doesn't fly any longer.  It worked so long as the monopoly could be sustained.  Too many of the lies and mischaracterizations have been outed and you and a few others here just waste their time trying to shout people down.

"Fauci has adamantly denied that the National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan. Paul blasted Fauci in a Tuesday tweet, saying that the NIAID director had "lied again."

"And I was right about his agency funding novel Coronavirus research at Wuhan," Paul said."

That's one example.  He did the same - and still does - regarding the efficacy of Ivermectin as a therapeutic.  The nonsensical edicts on masking and the day to day dodging on vaccine efficacy make it exceedingly clear that he's a paid shill and an overt LIAR.  Believe him if you like, just don't bother trying to be smug about it because the group that sees him for what he is... is expanding rapidly.

Fauci has twisted and spun information since the very beginning and has done so in service of selling a political narrative.  There is simply no other description for it.  Well, not for people with any degree of honesty or integrity.  Those who will look at Fauci's words and parse them like an ambulance-chasing lawyer, can make any claim, knowing the media will back it for him.  In fact, that's exactly what those here who reject any non-Fauci-approved information regularly do.  We see it all the time.  Sources that do not meet the standard of the gatekeepers (members, not moderators) are simply ignored or mocked as CTs.  It's actually a cheap dodge.  

Folks here who hang on the official narrative will never admit Fauci lied or even intentionally mislead.  Fortunately, proof is slowly bubbling to the surface from people within these organizations who have had enough.  Organizations like Veritas and Judicial Watch are getting the truth out and a day will come when the hypocrites will be seen for who they are, whether they choose to admit it or not.

[ChrLzs]

@and then, I know you're a little bit challenged, but I didn't ask for an opinion piece, or someone else's interpretation.

QUOTE Fauci lying.  So we can look at the entire context.

QUOTE.  Q U O T E.  Check a dictionary for the meaning of the word.  Show us what he actually said and CITE it.

The actual words.  The alleged lies.

 

And then (pun intended), I'll come back and actually look at the claim.  I DON'T run away or avoid or change the topic, or offer up other people's opinions as facts...

[+Nuclear Wessel]

1 minute ago, ChrLzs said:

@and then, I know you're a little bit challenged, but I didn't ask for an opinion piece, or someone else's interpretation.

QUOTE Fauci lying. 

It's really not hard to understand what you're asking for, so I don't know why it has been so difficult for them to actually do it.

[ChrLzs]

While we're waiting..... oh so patiently ..... here's my offering - obviously opinions are facts, so here you go:

So .... Rand Paul is a moron, according to @and thenlogic.

Edited January 14, 2022 by ChrLzs

[ChrLzs]

9 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

It's really not hard to understand what you're asking for, so I don't know why it has been so difficult for them to actually do it.

I know why it's difficult - they have been gullible enough to (rather ironically) accept the fake bull**** news they get fed on Facebook by their puppet masters.  Now, when they are trying to find the lie/s, they are having to check their facts and suddenly it has become difficult... as the bull**** they eagerly swallowed was not based on facts, or is quite different when you look at the full context.

They also know that if they pick the 'best lie' and I can show their best isn't correct, then they have nowhere to go other than admit that even on the most important bastions of their belief system, they got suckered.

Edited January 14, 2022 by ChrLzs

[ChrLzs]

BTW, @and then, Manwon has already asked the correct question, and no-one seems to want to go there...  So, Ill ask you, too.  Before you go too much further, I'd really strongly suggest you look closely into this simple question "What does 'Gain of Function' mean?"  In particular - "When and Why is it deemed 'bad'?"

I know what will happen if you start to delve into it, and yes, your eyes and brain will overload and you'll get all confused.  But trust me, you're going to need that knowledge if you want to push the LIE about Fauci lying on that topic...

Don't say you weren't warned.  

Edited January 15, 2022 by ChrLzs

[Grim Reaper 6]

11 hours ago, and then said:

I've come to the conclusion that many who spent 4 years in severe distress over an outsider who became president and then had the entire media go after every word he uttered to twist and malign as badly as possible, would now literally follow any narrative that was against him right up to the gates of hell and beyond.  To my mind, at least, THAT level of insane, baseless anger and hate is far more destructive than SARS-COV-2 ever could be.  I don't think we'll be seeing any vaccines for it either.

 

12 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Gee thanks for all that needless waffle.  Answer the question.  QUOTE the biggest Fauci lie.

Here we go, here's another attempt to dodge the question.  And next, s/he will throw poo at the fan and hope that nobody notices that @RavenHawk still didn't answer the question....

ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

No, quote the LIE, not the ties.

For cryin' out loud... more waffle .. ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

Yada yada.  ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

I'm losing the will to live.  If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny.  How much dodging can one person do?

ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

Snore.....

ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.

raven's arms must be so tired from all the handwaving...

No, it was Fauci we are talking about.  Remember?  Fauci.  You know, the one you accused of lying and that I asked you to QUOTE the lie.

 

You haven't done that.  Not even close.  So, we have to assume YOU lied about the lie.

I think I understand the problem Du Du Du!

[+Liquid Gardens]

18 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

I know why it's difficult - they have been gullible enough to (rather ironically) accept the fake bull**** news they get fed on Facebook by their puppet masters.  Now, when they are trying to find the lie/s, they are having to check their facts and suddenly it has become difficult... as the bull**** they eagerly swallowed was not based on facts, or is quite different when you look at the full context.

What baffles me is how close they get to the problem but just can't quite turn that mirror around all the way to include themselves.  They semi-correctly complain about how you can't trust the media and what they see as propaganda and the danger of being untethered from facts, and then they seem to go and just trust the (their) media and uncritically repeat what they heard.  I'd be totally cool with it if this uncritical repeating took the form of 'hey I just read this claim what do you think', but typically it is just accepted as truth and serves as the basis for all kinds of dystopian predictions and hatred and fear, etc.  

I agree with them, people disregarding the truth is not healthy, but I haven't seen any corrective measures offered either.  Matter of fact the most basic corrective measures I'd recommend are the simple questions, "how do you know that" and "what is your evidence for that", but as you are experiencing one side embraces those questions and the other avoids them like the plague (sorry, that simile doesn't make sense anymore).

[ChrLzs]

BTW, here's the latest work from Joe ("I am not a doctor, but I make claims anyway") Rogan.

Yes, it's reported by CNN, but just watch Joe give a false claim and get corrected by his guest and his own background researchers.  T'was only an 800% error, a minor scratch..  Note how he then changes the goalposts and questions his sources - the ones that his own researchers gave him!  Joe knows how tinfoilers operate!

[Golden Duck]

13 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

BTW, here's the latest work from Joe ("I am not a doctor, but I make claims anyway") Rogan.

Yes, it's reported by CNN, but just watch Joe give a false claim and get corrected by his guest and his own background researchers.  T'was only an 800% error, a minor scratch..  Note how he then changes the goalposts and questions his sources - the ones that his own researchers gave him!  Joe knows how tinfoilers operate!

Hmmm...Josh Szepz is an ABC journalist educated Western Sydney with Swiss Heritage 

Clearly he is a Apartheid, Nazi, Sharia Law advocating Left winger Totalitarian.

[psyche101]

3 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

BTW, here's the latest work from Joe ("I am not a doctor, but I make claims anyway") Rogan.

Yes, it's reported by CNN, but just watch Joe give a false claim and get corrected by his guest and his own background researchers.  T'was only an 800% error, a minor scratch..  Note how he then changes the goalposts and questions his sources - the ones that his own researchers gave him!  Joe knows how tinfoilers operate!

I don't know why people think he knows anything. I've said it before, I think I'm smarter than Joe Rogan, I think a lot of people are including listeners who let themselves down by dumbing down to his level. 

[acidhead]

[psyche101]

[RavenHawk]

On 1/14/2022 at 2:40 PM, ChrLzs said:

Gee thanks for all that needless waffle.  Answer the question.  QUOTE the biggest Fauci lie.Here we go, here's another attempt to dodge the question.  And next, s/he will throw poo at the fan and hope that nobody notices that @RavenHawk still didn't answer the question....NSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.No, quote the LIE, not the ties.For cryin' out loud... more waffle .. ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.Yada yada.  ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.I'm losing the will to live.  If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny.  How much dodging can one person do?ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.Snore.....ANSWER THE QUESTION - quote the lie.  It's a really simple question.raven's arms must be so tired from all the handwaving...No, it was Fauci we are talking about.  Remember?  Fauci.  You know, the one you accused of lying and that I asked you to QUOTE the lie.You haven't done that.  Not even close.  So, we have to assume YOU lied about the lie.

My apologies, I was one or two steps ahead in this conversation.  I must admit that I can’t comprehend that there are still people out there that don’t know about the lies??  Yes plural.  It takes a special kind of stupid to willfully and blindly remain ignorant.  But you do you.  If you could read, you’d see that I have implied one and stated another.  So to repeat, the first lie was Fauci’s denial that covid did not escape from the Wuhan lab.  That’s been documented.  The next was that Fauci was not funding gain of function at Wuhan.  Again, it’s been document through the NIH.  Another one is his denial of having financial interests in these experimental drugs.

 

[psyche101]

7 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

My apologies, I was one or two steps ahead in this conversation.  I must admit that I can’t comprehend that there are still people out there that don’t know about the lies??  Yes plural.  It takes a special kind of stupid to willfully and blindly remain ignorant.  But you do you.  If you could read, you’d see that I have implied one and stated another.  So to repeat, the first lie was Fauci’s denial that covid did not escape from the Wuhan lab.  That’s been documented.  The next was that Fauci was not funding gain of function at Wuhan.  Again, it’s been document through the NIH.  Another one is his denial of having financial interests in these experimental drugs.

 

Buy up on junk DNA before Fauci gets it all.........

  

 

Steps ahead........ LOL LOL LOL That's dead set hilarious...