4 ms·
A proven successful use of this drug would be very inconvenient for multiple media outlets who jumped at the (described as) unfounded claim. It would mean that
by cabaalis 6y ago
A proven successful use of this drug would be very inconvenient for multiple media outlets who jumped at the (described as) unfounded claim. It would mean that either (a) the authorities had more information than they did, or that (b) the authorities bet successfully with the same amount of information, which doesn't align with their constant reporting of idiocy.
- epistasis 6y agoNot true, it wouldn't inconvenience anybody if this worked out as a treatment, because nobody has claimed that it couldn't be proven to work.
- davrosthedalek 6y agoYou are right, but b) has an obvious logical fallacy. It assumes essentially that only intelligent people can win the lottery. Of course, this won't matter for the political discourse.
- rsynnott 6y ago> A proven successful use of this drug would be very inconvenient for multiple media outlets who jumped at the (described as) unfounded claim. Eh? Even if it did turn out to work, it would still have been an unfounded claim for Trump to claim it did without evidence, and a stupid and dangerous thing to do. That's what 'unfounded' means.