Thanks for the info. I admire some in the no-virus but not necessarily everything everybody says. I want to stay anonymous and unmonitized so I can be a free spirit writer, and avoid professional complications. Some of the no-virus do not want to commit to a stance on something they can not fully back up, and they do benefit from the com…
Thanks for the info. I admire some in the no-virus but not necessarily everything everybody says. I want to stay anonymous and unmonitized so I can be a free spirit writer, and avoid professional complications. Some of the no-virus do not want to commit to a stance on something they can not fully back up, and they do benefit from the community they have built up. For disclosure, I do have some email exchange with some of them and it is helpful to share info off line.
If they choose not to focus on certain issues, that's fine but Scoglio IS taking a stance on the nanotech stuff and it's all BS for him. Unfortunately Coppolino stifled any debate in the comments section and Scoglio didn't even bother to engage with commenters. Very disappointing.
You can always put the info in your own post and send it out. If you link it in my comments I will restack it or paste the link into a new post for you. You would get > 3,000 persons to see it without having to collect subscribers and get the debate going on your and/or my comment section. I'm assuming you are allowed to copy that interview I dont know. As long as I (and you) dont monetize myself and call this SS "For educational purposes" I am able to put anything on it as long as referenced.
He'd just done a long interview with Coppolino (who I think published his paper) so I assume he would be interested in the feed back. I noticed he engaged quite a bit with commenters on his Nov22 interview with Torsten Engelbrecht published by Off-Guardian. I asked Coppolino if he'd be commenting and he replied "he's free to" or something like that.
So if someone comments on 1 platform they're obligated to comment on all platforms, and are sketchy in your mind if they don't? Again, he doesn't even have a SS account that I know of. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.
Not obligated but as it must have been one of the first interviews he'd done since his paper was published in English, maybe even the first, that Coppolino had also published it on his site and that Scoglio's stated aim in giving the interview was to foster further discussion on the subject ("we need to have a discussion with those who are on our side who take GO for granted, believe it"), yes I would have expected him to comment. I can't remember if you need to open a SS account to comment but I imagine it's not hard to do.
And discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion?
I don't open accounts on every platform so that I can respond to comments under my interviews. Life's too short. And Stefano is a busy man, not someone who spends much time on social media that I can see.
I didn't say "discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion" but that given it was his first interview on the subject after his paper was published in English by Coppolino on his site and that both he and Coppolino explicitly invited comments at the end of the interview, one might expect he would respond to at least some of the comments. Instead of that, Coppolino shut down the GO discussion, tried to shift the debate to virus/no virus issue (which just about everyone agreed on anyway), ignored important comments challenging Scoglio's claims - like those of John Lukash, but others too and banned or threatened to ban those he didn't agree with or couldn't answer. In reply to a comment, Coppolino said "He knows where this is published...Let's see if he shows up for the party" so I imagine he was hoping he would turn up. Anyway, as busy as he may be, I'm guessing Scoglio read the comments and realised a number of the commenters had researched the subject more thoroughly than himself.
You have clearly said/implied that Stefano should have commented on SS, and wrote on another thread "But that's a debate to have on Coppolino's show" - after I gave you Stefano's 20 page pdf on the topic of "graphene" that you apparently hadn't read yet even though it was included in Eric's article with the interview (https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/another-year-another-war-stefano#details).
Were you aware (as PM and I were) that that interview was conducted months before Eric finally published it?
Should Stefano have cleared his scheduled for months, waiting for Eric to finally publish so that he could be available to start commenting when you think he should?
How is Stefano responsible for Eric shutting down the comments? And how do you know that Stefano wouldn't have eventually chimed in if they hadn't been shut down?
I don't see any evidence that "graphene" actually exists in his articles, just references to "graphene" that he seems to assume exists.
Elsewhere in the comments under Eric's article I see people citing blogs about "graphene", patents and company websites as proof that "graphene" is real. Well we know there are "virus" patents and zillions of articles and companies discussing "viruses", even though they've never been shown to exist.
So can you point me to actual evidence of "graphene" existing, from these people who you say have researched the subject more thoroughly than Stefano?
Thanks for the info. I admire some in the no-virus but not necessarily everything everybody says. I want to stay anonymous and unmonitized so I can be a free spirit writer, and avoid professional complications. Some of the no-virus do not want to commit to a stance on something they can not fully back up, and they do benefit from the community they have built up. For disclosure, I do have some email exchange with some of them and it is helpful to share info off line.
If they choose not to focus on certain issues, that's fine but Scoglio IS taking a stance on the nanotech stuff and it's all BS for him. Unfortunately Coppolino stifled any debate in the comments section and Scoglio didn't even bother to engage with commenters. Very disappointing.
You can always put the info in your own post and send it out. If you link it in my comments I will restack it or paste the link into a new post for you. You would get > 3,000 persons to see it without having to collect subscribers and get the debate going on your and/or my comment section. I'm assuming you are allowed to copy that interview I dont know. As long as I (and you) dont monetize myself and call this SS "For educational purposes" I am able to put anything on it as long as referenced.
Sounds strange and I would just ignore what the Scog says then.
Is Stefano even on Substack? If he is, it's news to me.
I think it's Eric's interview someplace I may have seen it, I do not recall Stefano on SS as poster or commenter.
Right, so there's no surprise Stefano didn't engage in the comments if/when he's not even on ss.
He'd just done a long interview with Coppolino (who I think published his paper) so I assume he would be interested in the feed back. I noticed he engaged quite a bit with commenters on his Nov22 interview with Torsten Engelbrecht published by Off-Guardian. I asked Coppolino if he'd be commenting and he replied "he's free to" or something like that.
So if someone comments on 1 platform they're obligated to comment on all platforms, and are sketchy in your mind if they don't? Again, he doesn't even have a SS account that I know of. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.
Not obligated but as it must have been one of the first interviews he'd done since his paper was published in English, maybe even the first, that Coppolino had also published it on his site and that Scoglio's stated aim in giving the interview was to foster further discussion on the subject ("we need to have a discussion with those who are on our side who take GO for granted, believe it"), yes I would have expected him to comment. I can't remember if you need to open a SS account to comment but I imagine it's not hard to do.
And discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion?
I don't open accounts on every platform so that I can respond to comments under my interviews. Life's too short. And Stefano is a busy man, not someone who spends much time on social media that I can see.
I didn't say "discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion" but that given it was his first interview on the subject after his paper was published in English by Coppolino on his site and that both he and Coppolino explicitly invited comments at the end of the interview, one might expect he would respond to at least some of the comments. Instead of that, Coppolino shut down the GO discussion, tried to shift the debate to virus/no virus issue (which just about everyone agreed on anyway), ignored important comments challenging Scoglio's claims - like those of John Lukash, but others too and banned or threatened to ban those he didn't agree with or couldn't answer. In reply to a comment, Coppolino said "He knows where this is published...Let's see if he shows up for the party" so I imagine he was hoping he would turn up. Anyway, as busy as he may be, I'm guessing Scoglio read the comments and realised a number of the commenters had researched the subject more thoroughly than himself.
You have clearly said/implied that Stefano should have commented on SS, and wrote on another thread "But that's a debate to have on Coppolino's show" - after I gave you Stefano's 20 page pdf on the topic of "graphene" that you apparently hadn't read yet even though it was included in Eric's article with the interview (https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/another-year-another-war-stefano#details).
Were you aware (as PM and I were) that that interview was conducted months before Eric finally published it?
Should Stefano have cleared his scheduled for months, waiting for Eric to finally publish so that he could be available to start commenting when you think he should?
How is Stefano responsible for Eric shutting down the comments? And how do you know that Stefano wouldn't have eventually chimed in if they hadn't been shut down?
I found your comment with the links to John Lukash's articles (https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/another-year-another-war-stefano/comments).
I don't see any evidence that "graphene" actually exists in his articles, just references to "graphene" that he seems to assume exists.
Elsewhere in the comments under Eric's article I see people citing blogs about "graphene", patents and company websites as proof that "graphene" is real. Well we know there are "virus" patents and zillions of articles and companies discussing "viruses", even though they've never been shown to exist.
So can you point me to actual evidence of "graphene" existing, from these people who you say have researched the subject more thoroughly than Stefano?
Have you watched the Ian F Akyildiz video on Nonvaxer420 on rumble.
He’s one of jab inventors. It’s from 2020 & he explains the SCIENCE down to molecular level 😐. That’s where I got it