Not surprising you would uncritically quote DiResta.
You tend to pander to a certain political flank, after your quasi-legitimate work in debunking pseudoscience (sort of dunking on a 6ft hoop) transformed into a full-throated defense of radical NPI's and Pharma products to mitigate the effects of the COVID Pandemic. Along the way you hav…
Not surprising you would uncritically quote DiResta.
You tend to pander to a certain political flank, after your quasi-legitimate work in debunking pseudoscience (sort of dunking on a 6ft hoop) transformed into a full-throated defense of radical NPI's and Pharma products to mitigate the effects of the COVID Pandemic. Along the way you have attempted to blow up some of the most prestigious researchers alive today.
As I noted in other comments DiResta is a CIA political hack, who should never be quoted without acknowledging her own misdeeds. She is a censorship queen and at the time she wrote the study quoted (2015), Twitter deemed her lacking credibility.
Anyone uncritically quoting DiResta is naive or worse. In the context of 'vaccine misinformation' you agree to her conclusions and so you have 'respect' for her. Yet, if you have any concerns about the accuracy of her reporting and whether you too might be a pawn in her counter disinformation enterprise, you probably should read her research closely and disclaim any attempt to make her seem credible.
Please don't invoke Gorski's law as your response!
Not surprising you would uncritically quote DiResta.
You tend to pander to a certain political flank, after your quasi-legitimate work in debunking pseudoscience (sort of dunking on a 6ft hoop) transformed into a full-throated defense of radical NPI's and Pharma products to mitigate the effects of the COVID Pandemic. Along the way you have attempted to blow up some of the most prestigious researchers alive today.
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/2/e052891
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-making-of-covid-19-contrarian-doctors/
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-the-heck-happened-to-john-ioannidis/
As I noted in other comments DiResta is a CIA political hack, who should never be quoted without acknowledging her own misdeeds. She is a censorship queen and at the time she wrote the study quoted (2015), Twitter deemed her lacking credibility.
https://www.racket.news/p/twitter-files-gec-new-knowledge-and
https://public.substack.com/p/why-renee-diresta-leads-the-censorship
https://disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/twitter-files-yoel-roths-private
Anyone uncritically quoting DiResta is naive or worse. In the context of 'vaccine misinformation' you agree to her conclusions and so you have 'respect' for her. Yet, if you have any concerns about the accuracy of her reporting and whether you too might be a pawn in her counter disinformation enterprise, you probably should read her research closely and disclaim any attempt to make her seem credible.
Please don't invoke Gorski's law as your response!
https://disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/gorskis-law-a-skeptic-ends-discussion