Kary Mullis heavily criticising Anthony Fauci

originally posted by: nonspecific
So why are PCR tests used to detect STD's like clamyidia and gonereah?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

First read what PCR is. I gave you a link above.
Then make sure you know what diagnosis means.
Then watch the videos I linked. Also read the difference between sensitivity and specificity of tests.

PCR Tests can be used to help make a diagnosis. Diagnosis is made always by specialists and not by what a test says.

Kary Mullis has been very critical of the way PCR could be used.

I worked on a mobile COVID testing van for over a year.

I'm aware of how PCR works and also of all of the arguments against it being used for COVID.

We did this about 18 months or more ago now, it's old and some to death.

Take a look at the board history of ats and you'll see countless threads about fauci and Mullis and PCR and all the other things you seem to want to bring up again even though we've not even had them in use for it in about 8 months now.


a reply to: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: nonspecific
I worked on a mobile COVID testing van for over a year.

I'm aware of how PCR works and also of all of the arguments against it being used for COVID.

We did this about 18 months or more ago now, it's old and some to death.

Take a look at the board history of ats and you'll see countless threads about fauci and Mullis and PCR and all the other things you seem to want to bring up again even though we've not even had them in use for it in about 8 months now.


a reply to: Asmodeus3

This thread isn't about PCR Tests but since you asked me I answered. The topic is about Mullis criticising Fauci and the scientific & medical establishment. Obviously PCR can be easily brought up by any member (including myself) who takes part in the conversation as he was the one who discovered it and also made a lot of noise on its potential misuse.

The bottom line is that diagnosis can only be given by a specialist and not by a test. False positives, false negatives, PCR cycles, and sometimes incompetence by physicians can play a significant role in misdiagnosing one with a disease.

You may have worked in a mobile Covid Test van for a year but Mullis has been on the business of biochemistry and molecular biology for decades and he knew what it could happen.

He criticised Fauci for being incompetent and that he shouldn't be in the position he is.

Speaking of tests the Lateral Flow Tests have been recalled by the FDA among significant concerns for their accuracy. Actually the FDA advised anyone who had the Innova Lateral Flow Tests to throw them in the dustbin!

Link not working: But type FDA recalls Lateral Flow Tests

a reply to: kwakakev
Thanks for the link! 👍
sidenote gof

In 2014 mh17 filled with aids researchers heading to Australia was shot down by Ukraine buk 2 missile blamed on Russia.



This thread is about Mary Mullis though so I won't be entertaining the flak pack. 👍

originally posted by: loveguy
a reply to: kwakakev
Thanks for the link! 👍
sidenote gof

In 2014 mh17 filled with aids researchers heading to Australia was shot down by Ukraine buk 2 missile blamed on Russia.



This thread is about Mary Mullis though so I won't be entertaining the flak pack. 👍

Do you agree in his criticisms against Fauci and the scientific establishment?

a reply to: Asmodeus3
Dead men tell no tales.

The scientific establishment?

Patents are big business when it comes to healthcare.

Ivm is 30¢ a pill. Fda approved
Fauci pills range in the hundreds of $ per pill.

Parasites rely on a host.

In medicine and in business.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: nonspecific

When his own creation the PCR test was used to show that he was wrong it affected him profoundly.

Can you elaborate on that bit please?

Still no answer to your question by the other member. I have asked the same a few times but nothing yet. Seems to be avoiding to answer the question. The statement cannot be justified.

I haven't responded yet.

It's not obligatory.

Any answer I give is point blank ignored by you anyway and you just usually post a repeat of the same link you've put several times before.

It's been a while as this was all done to death a good while ago but I'll go through some old stuff and find some links so you can ignore them.


a reply to: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: nonspecific
I haven't responded yet.

It's not obligatory.

Any answer I give is point blank ignored by you anyway and you just usually post a repeat of the same link you've put several times before.

It's been a while as this was all done to death a good while ago but I'll go through some old stuff and find some links so you can ignore them.


a reply to: Asmodeus3

No worries.
It's not obligatory but it's a good tactic when trying to avoid answering a question for which there is no answer.

Just to conclude this.

Mullis never had anything personal against Fauci but was driven by Fauci's incompetence and his politics, given that he was the Director of the NIAID since 1984.

On the latter part Mullis wasn't proven wrong about anything and the statement you made was arbitrary.

a reply to: Asmodeus3



No smoking guns here but certainly enough to suggest that Mullis was flawed in some of his reasoning as most people are.

No one is infallible, Einstein was wrong about a lot of things in his lifetime as was Newton.



Link

link

link

link

link

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Asmodeus3



No smoking guns here but certainly enough to suggest that Mullis was flawed in some of his reasoning as most people are.

No one is infallible, Einstein was wrong about a lot of things in his lifetime as was Newton.



Link

link

link

link

link

Some of the articles need registration.
The other articles nowhere prove anything about Mullis but they are parroting some attempts to find flaws in his criticisms against that establishment and Fauci.

Desperate attempts in the absence of evidence and attempts to assassinate his character commonly known as character assassination. From being a womaniser to being a recreational drug user, using '___', and an astrology guy. Nonsense!!!

I mean just laughable.

Coming from the usual suspects...

a reply to: Asmodeus3

So you take your usual route of just point blank refusing to even look at anything and then hunker down with your own beliefs and take a cheap swipe at me as a person.

I expected nothing less.



Why ask me for things you have no intention of looking at, it wastes both of our times.

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Asmodeus3



No smoking guns here but certainly enough to suggest that Mullis was flawed in some of his reasoning as most people are.

No one is infallible, Einstein was wrong about a lot of things in his lifetime as was Newton.



Link

link

link

link

link

I wonder what these flaws are when you are describing Einstein and you make a comparison with Newton having refereed initially to Mullis. Total confusion!

a reply to: nonspecific

When his own creation the PCR test was used to show that he was wrong it affected him profoundly.

How was he wrong?
I mean ....Cetus sold it for $300 million (so one of your links states).

Mullis scoffed at the scientists who scoffed at his idea. They said it wouldn't work, but he proved that it did.
Cetus paid him a $10,000 bonus for his invention, then turned around and sold it for $300 million.

Maybe you could provide a quote from your links that shows how he was wrong, for clarification?

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Asmodeus3

So you take your usual route of just point blank refusing to even look at anything and then hunker down with your own beliefs and take a cheap swipe at me as a person.

I expected nothing less.



Why ask me for things you have no intention of looking at, it wastes both of our times.

The arguments made in these sources are nothing more than attempts to assassinate someone's character. They are untrue. Even if they were true i.e even if Mullis was a womaniser then this has nothing to do with his academic and scientific abilities or his very well qualified criticisms against the medical establishment and Fauci.

By your own flawed logic then Einstein also has to be questioned academically because he wasn't the best type of husband.

Your logic and reasoning is just flawed.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

I'm not interested in him as a person I'm interested as him as a scientist.

Yes he did amazing work inventing PCR but he also thought that Aids was not connected to HIV, that there was no hole in the ozone layer and that man made climate change was a myth.

He also believed in astrology and has talked about speaking to ghosts and things from the astral plains.

When you look at his opinions you have to factor in both what made sense and what did not.

Claiming that what he said must be true as he won a Nobel prize and was therefore a genius is fundamentally flawed.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: nonspecific

When his own creation the PCR test was used to show that he was wrong it affected him profoundly.

How was he wrong?
I mean ....Cetus sold it for $300 million (so one of your links states).

Mullis scoffed at the scientists who scoffed at his idea. They said it wouldn't work, but he proved that it did.
Cetus paid him a $10,000 bonus for his invention, then turned around and sold it for $300 million.

Maybe you could provide a quote from your links that shows how he was wrong, for clarification?

I have asked twice yesterday and his answer is that he isn't obliged to answer the question...
So when debating some members can employ selective ways to answer or not answering at all when there is no evidence that backs up their arguments.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

I responded to you earlier, I was busy yesterday.

Can you not converse with me without using other members as an echo chamber?

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I'm not interested in him as a person I'm interested as him as a scientist.

Yes he did amazing work inventing PCR but he also thought that Aids was not connected to HIV, that there was no hole in the ozone layer and that man made climate change was a myth.

He also believed in astrology and has talked about speaking to ghosts and things from the astral plains.

When you look at his opinions you have to factor in both what made sense and what did not.

Claiming that what he said must be true as he won a Nobel prize and was therefore a genius is fundamentally flawed.

Your second paragraph contains a series of strawman arguments and claims which implies clearly that you haven't understood what he said. You clearly misunderstood him and you misrepresent him continuously.

Your last paragraph is also a strawman argument as nobody has claimed what you said.

You can do better in debates. Try again please.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Ok ill try again then.

What is your reasoning for Mullis being correct in his criticism of fauci?