Let’s debunk the Debunker: the Montagnier case and the dung thrown out of the “Context”
We live in the era of the "Debunkers", that is, of people paid to affirm the truth of one side at the expense of another. Once this work was done in much more refined, financing poets, philosophers and even fine journalists. Today it is done by providing financial resources to characters who, otherwise, would perform more useful functions from an economic and social point of view, such as breeding, agriculture or writing crosswords: the so-called “Debunkers”.
“A true journalist; he explains very well what he does not know ”wrote Leo Longanesi, one who knew about it. Which is legitimate: knowledge must be disseminated and vulgarized, entering the maze of society. The problem is that a journalist "Who explains and does not know", an old-fashioned popularizer, would never have allowed himself to contradict the source. Instead, modern Debunkers allow themselves, from their “Not knowing”, to contest other “Who know”, because, usually, paid by someone. And here comes the "Debunker".
Let's take the practical case: Professor Montagnier, Nobel Prize for Medicine in Milan, arrived in Milan yesterday. He speaks briefly in public, is of a certain age, and says things about vaccination campaigns that may or may not be shared, but which those in the know could dispute on the tip of science. Here is the video:
I don't want to go into the matter: I am not a doctor and, even if I could potentially do some research on the scientific writings on the subject, I don't have the time to do it. A job that, if done seriously, would take a couple of days away.
Less than an hour after his intervention we have the official "Debunkerizer", paid for by Facebook, who starts to debunk Montagnier:
The problem is that the "Debunker" debunkerizes things that Montagnier did not say in Milan, giving the impression of speaking without having listened to the speech, actually quite short, The Debuker debunkerized … no one knows what, of the sentences he extrapolated himself, we don't know where from, but they have nothing to do with what was said in Milan.
Among other things, if it is acceptable that a doctor contests Montagnier, perhaps better if he is good, we ask ourselves on the basis of what it is possible for a graduate in X to debunk, falsify, anything of what is not his subject, taking, too , random phrases taken from the most varied scientific writings. It seems, made worse, the method of the Jesuits of the eighteenth century, which hanged people on sentences removed from their context. Similarly here it is falsified with four random quotes.
In reality, the very short time elapsed between the "Debunkerization" article, commonly defined as sputtanazione, and the speech held in Milan, is so short that there is a well-founded doubt that the article in question is a real journalistic killer written in cold well before the Nobel Prize. It would have been a lot of fun if he, taking everyone by surprise, had invited everyone to get vaccinated! What would Open do, would he debunk anyway?
The most scandalous thing is, in fact, that these media killer works are also well paid. Even if their effectiveness seems to me to be increasingly scarce.
Thanks to our Telegram channel you can stay updated on the publication of new articles of Economic Scenarios.
The article Debunkeriamo il Debunker: the Montagnier case and the dung thrown out of the "Context" comes from ScenariEconomici.it .
This is a machine translation of a post published on Scenari Economici at the URL https://scenarieconomici.it/debunkeriamo-il-debunker-il-caso-montagnier-e-lo-sterco-gettato-fuori-dal-contesto/ on Sun, 16 Jan 2022 14:06:22 +0000.