Gorski is the worst kind of critic, casting aspersions carelessly and frequently. He is all about denigrating people he doesn’t agree with. His positions are nearly always poorly informed. I’d love to see a debate between him and Dr. Blaylock or yourself. He would embarrass himself.
It's sad cuz people like him are in their own ways very smart, hard-working, and well-meaning. (I've learned a good bit from his articles over the years.) And yet their actions just drive more polarity instead of "saving" anyone. For a science-promoter, he ought to be better at assessing the effects of his actions. Definitely needs to work on his compassion and ability to hold a dialogue with people he disagrees with.
Wondering if he is running for any kind of office..... gaslighting at its finest....he acts like a seasoned politician......quick...someone give him a job.....
Dr. Walter Block makes an interesting case against the idea of defamation as a criminal offense; in brief: it may cause lowering people's opinion of you, but you don't own their minds, or their opinions of you. Therefore defamation is never an offense against your physical person or your legitimately owned property. [I heard Walter Block likes to take baths with rubber duckies!]
The Gorski who tweeted to Dr. Didier Raoult that he was "full of sh*t", saying he couldn't refute the Lancet study (about hydroxychloroquine) so lied and insinuated the data was fraudulent...and then the Lancet retracted it, because it was fraudulent? THAT Gorski? LOL
When Offit has turned anti-vax, why bother with an irrelevant minion like Gorski?
Gorski is the worst kind of critic, casting aspersions carelessly and frequently. He is all about denigrating people he doesn’t agree with. His positions are nearly always poorly informed. I’d love to see a debate between him and Dr. Blaylock or yourself. He would embarrass himself.
What an ironic tee-shirt he has, since he believes science must conform to his opinion
It's sad cuz people like him are in their own ways very smart, hard-working, and well-meaning. (I've learned a good bit from his articles over the years.) And yet their actions just drive more polarity instead of "saving" anyone. For a science-promoter, he ought to be better at assessing the effects of his actions. Definitely needs to work on his compassion and ability to hold a dialogue with people he disagrees with.
He had blocked me on twitter back in 2019 although I NEVER had any sort of interaction with him EVER. It was really weird.
Wondering if he is running for any kind of office..... gaslighting at its finest....he acts like a seasoned politician......quick...someone give him a job.....
"Monitoring antivax mailing lists can be useful."
What does that mean? Is he getting ready to report us to the Vaxx Gestapo for our re-education in work camps?
I truly hope he can get as many boosters as he desires.
Let's not call this graphene injection a "vaccine" - and this guy still has a chance to be trialed for participation in a genocide
Gorski always does defamation first whatever scientific point he may try to introduce, it is always defamation first.
That pissed me off so much I just made a donation.
Gorski blocked one of my aliases on his site.
When it comes to science Gorski swims with the ducks.
Dr. Walter Block makes an interesting case against the idea of defamation as a criminal offense; in brief: it may cause lowering people's opinion of you, but you don't own their minds, or their opinions of you. Therefore defamation is never an offense against your physical person or your legitimately owned property. [I heard Walter Block likes to take baths with rubber duckies!]
The Gorski who tweeted to Dr. Didier Raoult that he was "full of sh*t", saying he couldn't refute the Lancet study (about hydroxychloroquine) so lied and insinuated the data was fraudulent...and then the Lancet retracted it, because it was fraudulent? THAT Gorski? LOL