- Re: This is a crude hit piece Archived Message
Posted by walter
on May 8, 2020, 10:45 am, in reply to "Re: This is a crude hit piece"
Hi Adamski. It's interesting that in response to my criticism of the piece by Dr Grande, you ramp up the attack on Dr Mikovits. Very presumptive of you  Firstly, as there is nothing whatsoever about Dr Grande's piece or my criticism in your long reply - can I take it that we are in agreement that it is a hit piece? Why did you do take this stance - do you presume that I have aligned myself with Dr Mikovits' claims? Rookie error. Though I'd have to say she has won round one. I'll probably post a bit more on the hit piece, but I find it fascinating that an apparently competent critic can not come up with a clear rebuttal of the 'wild' claims of someone he is staking out as unhinged, and concentrates his efforts on spreading such empty innuendo for his gallery of admirers. You say "Please research the things you watch." Please update your irony settings The 'problem' was the speed of Gande's response, which you promptly threw up and (I think) endorsed. Did you research that? Where is your own critical judgement? As far as Mikovits' claims are concerned I have looked into some of it, and will look some more. when I have time. How long do you think it takes to do a reasonably accurate transcript of a 25 minute video? How long did you think my rebuttal of your hit piece took? That is what I was responding to, and I believe I did enough research for that purpose. Who know I might reply to your own criticisms of Dr Mikovits - at least you did a better job on her than did Dr Grande. I note that you began by making assertions ("Mikovits is a discredited scientist", "who falsified data ", "She wanted something to be true, so she manipulated the study to "prove" that it was") but provide no facts to justify those assertions. However you do furnish some links later which I will read. Maybe you can equalize the score for the establishment vs Dr Mikovits. Let's not bunker down into competitive positions against each other, it polarises the debates on the board. Cheers |