And we're poorer for it. We need lots of reliable energy ASAP not this suicidal policy.

I think combinations and layers of problems and zero willingness to acknowledge and investigate. Itâ(TM)s perfectly feasible that *some* of the postmasters were unprofessional but there was little support because they relied on legal threats being the leverage. Throw in some race conditions that probably got fixed over time but never acknowledged etc. also the courts themselves didnâ(TM)t help because they didnâ(TM)t push back when it was obvious the prosecution had nothing. Judges can throw out cases but they let them be heard.

It appears to be Crowdstrike related rather than specifically Microsoft.

Usually this just means there's a lot of money to be made and you need some PR to scare off new entrants into the market. Seen it before.

They are chasing âoecasesâ not a scientific metric like randomised community sampling rate.

So naive.

Was Gates just always misunderstood? Historically he was liked if you were a Microsoft shareholder. Now UK politicians are fawning over him like heâ(TM)s going to do us all a big favour. His PR machine over the last 20 years has been very effective. Itâ(TM)s very very concerning for those people with an ounce of common sense.

Just swap your fingers in an unpredictable way. Donâ(TM)t press same number with same finger. Etc.

It also says masks have no impact if youâ(TM)re under 50 years old.

Iâ(TM)ve not been particularly convinced by Ivermectin but this is an odd sentence: âoewe do not see the treatment benefit that a lot of the advocates believe should have beenâ - why not just say what results you found in your study?

Youâ(TM)re still pushing a blatant false dichotomy.

What? I simply pointed out there was a blatant false dichotomy.

What exactly is stopping you seeing the most obvious gaping hole in your logic? Youâ(TM)re pushing a clear false dichotomy. Itâ(TM)s perfectly feasible that itâ(TM)s a zoonotic virus that was being studied in a lab.

I do not understand why people buy this argument. Zoonotic or lab leak is obviously a false dichotomy. It can obviously be a virus of zoonotic origin that was being investigated in a lab. The fact that this is so obvious but is constantly ignored makes me wonder whatâ(TM)s going on with this gaslighting.

In can be from an animal _and_ still leaked from a/the lab. These bizarre press releases just add credence to the lab leak hypothesis if anything.