Lol, they confessed that they did a thorough search and couldn't find EVEN ONE responsive record. Not one.
It was not an impossible request to satisfy, and they certainly didn't not state that. You are simply making things up. I wonder why.
You made this up too: "they don't have in their library the publications by their own researc…
Lol, they confessed that they did a thorough search and couldn't find EVEN ONE responsive record. Not one.
It was not an impossible request to satisfy, and they certainly didn't not state that. You are simply making things up. I wonder why.
You made this up too: "they don't have in their library the publications by their own researchers". That is not what the letter says, nor would that make a bit of sense.
They only indicated that they don't have a list of all the studies that NRC researchers have ACCESSED, and I never asked them for one.
They did not indicate in any way that I was barking up the wrong tree. It's the National Research Council, a perfectly appropriate institution to query because if any "virus" science existed, they'd be expected to have it. But they don't.
They confessed they have not a single record. The rest is distraction, which you are capitalizing on to confuse people. Again, I wonder why.
The only link I see from you is a link to a REVIEW, which is not a study (and does not cite any valid scientific studies). Cite a valid, scientific study, if I'm wrong.
And show us where Jessica Rose supposedly called me out.
Lol, they confessed that they did a thorough search and couldn't find EVEN ONE responsive record. Not one.
It was not an impossible request to satisfy, and they certainly didn't not state that. You are simply making things up. I wonder why.
You made this up too: "they don't have in their library the publications by their own researchers". That is not what the letter says, nor would that make a bit of sense.
They only indicated that they don't have a list of all the studies that NRC researchers have ACCESSED, and I never asked them for one.
They did not indicate in any way that I was barking up the wrong tree. It's the National Research Council, a perfectly appropriate institution to query because if any "virus" science existed, they'd be expected to have it. But they don't.
They confessed they have not a single record. The rest is distraction, which you are capitalizing on to confuse people. Again, I wonder why.
The only link I see from you is a link to a REVIEW, which is not a study (and does not cite any valid scientific studies). Cite a valid, scientific study, if I'm wrong.
And show us where Jessica Rose supposedly called me out.