- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 21,607
he fact she can spell pronoun puts her in he upper 20% of GOP leaning people.You wanna go to congress but you don't know what a pronoun is?
Either an ironic double misspelling, or a clever double misspelling.he fact she can spell pronoun puts her in he upper 20% of GOP leaning people.
A combination of rum and a shitty keyboardEither an ironic double misspelling, or a clever double misspelling.
Yes. Yes he absolutely does.
Well here a bbc article, with an expert saying it was gain-of-function, and another saying that "There is not always consensus [on gain-of-function research] even amongst experts, and institutions interpret and apply policy differently."Almost any molecular manipulation of a virus, or bacteria (my field) could be classified as "gain of function". For instance, one of the most basic practices in bacteriology is the replacement of a gene of interest with a gene that encodes antibiotic resistance (usually ampicillin). This allows you to "find" those cells in which your gene of interest was deleted and will kill all "wild-type" cells. Similarly in viral research you will see scientist insert viral proteins from one virus into another virus (that is deemed benign) to study what the function of that protein is. To put it simply, I can cut off Messi's left foot and graft it onto my knee, but that doesn't mean I have gained the ability to score a worldy.
Besides, what was in conflict here was not if the Wuhan Institute was doing GOF research, but if the NIH/NAID was funding it. The scope of the awarded grant to EcoHealth would suggest that this was NOT a funded purpose of the grant. Is there a chance that someone was operating outside the scope of the award? Sure, but from what I have read that is not likely the case unless you take a VERY liberal definition of GOF as your basis.
In any case, Paul's ultimate goal, which he actually SAYS, is to make a case that NIH research resulted in the deaths pf millions of people.
The Paul/Fauci discussion has 2 parts:Well here a bbc article, with an expert saying it was gain-of-function, and another saying that "There is not always consensus [on gain-of-function research] even amongst experts, and institutions interpret and apply policy differently."
If that's the case, it seems a bit disingenuous to act like it's outrageous to consider such research as gain of function.
https://www.bbc.com/news/57932699
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Of course. Both sides and the media count on big business money, so why would they give 2 shits about labor?always skeptical of "nobody is covering this" but it seems consistently true wrt labour issues
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
i scrolled way down on the NYT page and found nothing, even in the much smaller national and city headlines:
They don't want to give people ideas. This country needs organized labor protests like I need oxygen.always skeptical of "nobody is covering this" but it seems consistently true wrt labour issues
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
i scrolled way down on the NYT page and found nothing, even in the much smaller national and city headlines:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
@Eboue multiple hate-crime posts here, better start deletingThe legislation, which is up for a vote in the Republican-controlled county legislature on Monday, would add police officers and other "first responders" to the county's Human Rights Law, which protects individuals from discrimination based on their race, religion, gender and sexual orientation. No other profession is included in the law.
The legislation, sponsored by Legis. Josh Lafazan, a Woodbury independent who caucuses with Democrats, and Legis. Delia DeRiggi-Whitton (D-Glen Cove), would allow the county attorney to sue on behalf of officers if they are harassed, menaced or injured due to their status as a "first responder."
They hate the other parties more than anything. It's already on ABDems level. Policy has nothing to do. And to be fair to them D or R wont get them better anyways, same shit different year.I'm not sure I'm following this. Are you saying the kind of people who believe in conspiracy theories are so unreliable that we shouldn't believe them when they say they believe in conspiracy theories? That seems like some sort of very circular logic. I don't think it's possible to say that as many as 20% of people are just lying.
I certainly agree that many people, particularly they kind that would agree with the sorts of statements I quoted, have views that are logically inconsistent, but I don't think the right conclusion to that is that they don't actually hold those beliefs. People have always held logically inconsistent views. Just look at how many poor, working class whites, many of whom are on welfare, vote for Republicans. The same phenomenon can be seen in most of the western world, really. I'm sure many of the people in the survey, if pressed, wouldn't be able to reasonably articulate why they held those views, but I still think they believe they're right.
ya, was going to post this. a real work of art in that you can't ever tell what the next sentence is going to be about.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I agree, they're there to look like they just can't manage to hold back corporate interests. While they represent corporate interests. Lots of reform ideas until they get in power.Senators Go After Unemployment Fraud — But Not Tax Cheats — To Pay For Infrastructure
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...-cheats_n_6102e399e4b0d3b5897b8bda?ri18n=true
Once again, Democrats bends over for Republicans. Corporate Dems are paid to lose.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
two birds and all thatThat's the Q-purge, by another name.
Hopefully he will take his brother with him. Can't stand him on CNN.His recent pressers to defend himself reek of narcissistic defense. Just gives me that vibe he'd crush your life with the power he possessed.