That's all just a distraction strategy, Steve. I think you know that the sarcasm is the eventual result of Kirsch's demonstrated unwillingness to cut the BS and simply address the very simple lack of scientific proof as clearly explained in Kaufman's SOVI document. Nobody from this side of the issue approached Kirsch with sarcasm. And wh…
That's all just a distraction strategy, Steve. I think you know that the sarcasm is the eventual result of Kirsch's demonstrated unwillingness to cut the BS and simply address the very simple lack of scientific proof as clearly explained in Kaufman's SOVI document. Nobody from this side of the issue approached Kirsch with sarcasm. And while Jon has proven himself a more adept at the scientific thought process than 99.9% of the scientists, he's not the author of the challenge that started this spat. The fact that Kirsch has so loudly dug himself into an indefensible position while disparaging the 'virus deniers', and still not submitted a written argument disputing the challengers' virus isolation assertions or agreed to help organize the research proofs, speaks volumes. Sure, sarcasm is no way to initiate a conversation, but that's not what happened, and I think you know that. At this point, sarcasm has become an appropriate response, and Jon's is quite friendly compared to the attempted character assassination by the likes of Kirsch and others supporting the Rockefeller virus fraud cartel.
That's all just a distraction strategy, Steve. I think you know that the sarcasm is the eventual result of Kirsch's demonstrated unwillingness to cut the BS and simply address the very simple lack of scientific proof as clearly explained in Kaufman's SOVI document. Nobody from this side of the issue approached Kirsch with sarcasm. And while Jon has proven himself a more adept at the scientific thought process than 99.9% of the scientists, he's not the author of the challenge that started this spat. The fact that Kirsch has so loudly dug himself into an indefensible position while disparaging the 'virus deniers', and still not submitted a written argument disputing the challengers' virus isolation assertions or agreed to help organize the research proofs, speaks volumes. Sure, sarcasm is no way to initiate a conversation, but that's not what happened, and I think you know that. At this point, sarcasm has become an appropriate response, and Jon's is quite friendly compared to the attempted character assassination by the likes of Kirsch and others supporting the Rockefeller virus fraud cartel.