by Jim West (please share and cite)
Why would the mainstream support them with such expensive publicity?
Because... they promote belief in deadly viruses such as the COVID virus, which serve as distractions from industrial pollution (the most common cause of disease). They promote profitable toxic pharmaceutical treatments for "virus" diseases.
Kirsch promotes the very toxic pharmaceutical, Ivermectin, as a treatment for COVID. Surprisingly, Mike Adams believes in Ivermectin. Ivermectin is taken on the belief that it destroys the "virus". Adams continues to promote virus scare stories generally, re other viruses, other than COVID virus. Perhaps they are just dealing with the politics of effective marketing... Why reject naïve money?
Kirsch is a billionaire and runs his blog and research with expert mainstream teams. To his credit, he doesn't directly censor comments when they disagree with him. Yet he does find ways to avoid confrontation.
Kirsch's Blog Post "How to tell who is telling you the truth"
He declares that viruses exist and Rappoport etc are "liars" when they deny virus existence. He refers to his "Fraud Test".
I defended Rappoport etc by commenting tersely, and Kirsch answered (see below). I cornered him with a superior Fraud Test, and he would not continue. Kirsch is smart, though blind to, or running from, the commonsense position I presented to him. Apparently he could not get an acceptable answer from his research team.
First, I gained many Likes with this comment:
Then unprecedented censorship began. His blog manager apparently turned off the Likes option, as they no longer show. I no longer get an automatic notice of my Likes count. The entire section of blog comments was replaced with another comment section since many others such as Mike Stone were lampooning him.
JWest (8/22/2022): Steve, viruses are sold as infective rogue nucleic acid fragments that cause epidemics like polio, COVID, influenza.
But virology has no foundation because it omits confounding factors such as pollution.
You can't win.
SKirsch (8/22/2022): Please accept my bet [that viruses exist] and take my money!
JWest (8/22/2022): I'm debating you NOW. And you're using money as a distraction.
SKirsch (8/23/2022): You are avoiding answering my simple questions. If you want a response answer my questions first. Thank you. See the pinned post
JWest (8/23/2022): Steve, you declare in the pinned post: "I couldn’t find any commenter that offered a superior set of “fraud tests.” No alternatives were proposed at all. If you don’t like my list, why not tell us the correct list?"
My "correct list" is one test, which is universally agreed upon by scientists: Studies must control for confounding factors (such as pollution).
Virology fails that test.
SKirsch (8/24/2022): that's silly. that's not how science works. [!!!]
JWest (8/24/2022): Actually, it does work that way.
"To ensure the internal validity of your research, you must consider the impact of confounding variables."
SKirsch (8/28/2022): [No answer]
JWest (8/28/2022): Steve, we had a tete-a-tete, and I checkmated you with my simpler and superior Fraud Test:
I still await your response. [as of 9/25/2022]
A non-Kirsch continuation
11/5/2022 Steve is hypocritical as he misrepresents himself: