Covid and Didier Raoult (supporter of hydroxychloroquine): analyzes on the pandemic

[Janic]

Janic wrote:

[*]in more than 100 years you would have to be very strong to know them all, so that's what the official statistical archives are for, they just have to be consulted and compare with BP advertising and marketing

simpleton

You're just an old XXX storyteller.

I love it when a little younger XXX than me, finds himself buried in his m...e up to the neck and who opens his mouth wide to also vomit there.
So this rude character despises to the highest degree the statisticians of all countries thinking themselves more competent than all of them put together.
But it is the reincarnation of ABCile !!!!... who also claimed that these State officials are fabricators and that he was more competent than them without ever proving it. It is true that the indisputable evidence, they do not care because they believe, to the point of ridicule, that their BP gurus are more right than the whole earth, the universe and even beyond!

PS: it is not useless to remind geeks fed from the cradle by the internet, that there is another world beyond and that a heap of documents are not computerized and that it is not possible to consult only on the spot.

[sicetaitsimple]

So this rude character despises to the highest degree the statisticians of all countries thinking themselves more competent than all of them put together.

In no way did I question these statisticians and their statistics
On the other hand, the fable repeated over and over again is that YOU went to consult them on the spot and that after study, YOU deduced "that no vaccine had ever demonstrated the slightest effectiveness".
You must have kept track of such work? Go ahead, show.

[Janic]

Janic wrote:

So this rude character despises to the highest degree the statisticians of all countries thinking themselves more competent than all of them put together

simpleton

In no way did I question these statisticians and their statistics

and yet you stubbornly refuse to consult these stats if only to piss me off by proving to ME that what I say is false!

On the other hand, the fable repeated over and over again is that YOU went to consult them on the spot and that after study, YOU deduced "that no vaccine had ever demonstrated the slightest effectiveness".
You must have kept track of such work? Go ahead, show.

still in your usual fantasies assuming I am this or that! It is not to old XXX that we learn to make faces.
A) you will not find anywhere that I wrote that I went there, others much more competent than me have done it and if they are disputed, it is necessary and sufficient to do the same to decide between interpretations of these stats and not by partisan interpreters. However, you have to do it or find out who did it in your place and place for France and other European countries with statistics.
B) I deduct nothing! Or else these stats prove it, they, historical reality or they show the opposite. However, you will have to demonstrate that the interpretation of ineffectiveness can be scientifically established according to ces official documents.
But since neither you nor your clones have succeeded in achieving this, we can consider that you are not capable of it.

[sicetaitsimple]

you won't find anywhere that I wrote that I went there, others than me did

Ah good??? It would be necessary to research, but I have more interesting things to do....
But then, if it is other than you who have done it, why do you hesitate to publish their results, since they must be public?
-Janic: I tell you "no vaccine has ever proven the slightest effectiveness".
-Me: Where did you get it from?
Janic: Others...
Me: Thank you

[Janic]

Janic wrote:

you won't find anywhere that I wrote that I went there, others than me did

simpleton

Ah good??? It would be necessary to research, but I have more interesting things to do....

you have to believe not, given all the time you spend wanting to be right without reason, because otherwise you would have already found it!

But then, if it is other than you who have done it, why do you hesitate to publish their results, since they must be public?

- There is no hesitation in publishing what is public (which has been done by the way) but in the face of the bad faith of those who will challenge them without wanting to present their own publications. Just wait and let them present their own work... nonexistent by the way!

[sicetaitsimple]

The post of the year!
After repeating over several years "no vaccine has ever proven the slightest effectiveness" and "one only has to study the archives of the different states to find out", here is Janic telling us:
"you won't find anywhere that I wrote that I went there". In short, he knows nothing about it, contrary to what he would have liked to believe.
after that:
"There is no hesitation in publishing what is public (which has been done by the way) but in the face of the bad faith of those who will challenge them without wanting to present their own publications. Just wait and let them present their own work...nonexistent by the way!"

If there is any hesitation, do it! Especially since it doesn't seem to be your own work!

Oh but no "there is no hesitation in asserting something, except that perhaps others (in bad faith) will dispute it...."
Don't you feel like you've reached the bottom of the bottom of the ridiculous?

[Janic]

20/08/23, 17:52

The post of the year!
After repeating over several years "no vaccine has ever proven the slightest effectiveness" and "one only has to study the archives of the different states to find out",

Well, you see when you want, you can make an almost complete quotation; all you have to do is think about it (even if it's difficult for you) and study the archives in question!

here is what Janic tells us:
" you won't find anywhere that I wrote that I went there". In short, he knows nothing about it,

in short, YOU don't really know anything about it!
Again learn to read French properly by respecting the fundamental rules. The YOU won't find anywhere is about you, not me, emphasizing that you don't know and don't want to know! contrary to what you would have liked to believe.

after that:
“There is no hesitation in publishing what is public (WHAT HAS BEEN DONE ELSEWHERE) but in front of the bad faith of those which will dispute them without wanting to present their own publications. Just wait and let them present their own work...nonexistent by the way!"

If there is any hesitation, do it!

Still angry with the French once again the dopey. What has already been done is not to be done again

Especially since it doesn't seem to be your own work!

It's no more obvious that your beliefs aren't the result of your work either, but of your cramming your BP

Oh no, "there is no hesitation in asserting something, except that perhaps others (in bad faith) will dispute it.

as long as you make a quote, do it complete as above without trying to delete the meaning!

Don't you feel like you've reached the bottom of the bottom of the ridiculous?

compared to yours? No! Above all, you are not aware of your stubbornness in refusing to check knowing that you would be obliged to recognize the scientifically established facts contradicting your superstitious beliefs in the vaccine myth, hence the abyssal ridiculousness of your speech without evidence.

[Robob]

2023 cover photo of APHM_actu:

APHM2023.jpg (188 KB) Viewed 394 times

2019 cover photo of APHM_actu:

APHM2019.jpg (79.4 KB) Viewed 394 times

That's it, they razed the IHU!

[izentrop]

For you Robob, it's cheap

[Robob]

For you Robob, it's cheap

Yes, they were forced to increase the price (€108) because they had too much demand compared to the size of the room.

The Trudeau government did not agree to rent the Olympic stadium in Montreal, more suitable for its conference.

That said, I understand that this upsets you and your fuck-checker friend a bit.