Do you think we’re debating you? We’re mocking you.

You seem pretty obviously upset.

Don’t think you understood the underlying point of their comment.

lol ok bud

REMINDER: THIS IS WHERE WE STARTED

MY POINT = PROVEN CORRECT

PLEASE KEEP MOVING THE GOALPOST

The paper wasn’t retracted until 2010 lol. The point is that fraudulent papers can be published.

Still lmao.

This just shows the resilience of publishing, and the scientific community to fraud and [alleged] corruption

Uh… sure it does, buddy.

lmao

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud

Tell me more about how antivax scientists didn’t successfully publish a paper with tons of biases and nonsensical findings.

No paper would be published if it was biased and as selective as you say.

That is incredibly naive of you and truly points to your lack of credibility.