Not sure I can buy that. Nobody is worthy of belief simply because of their position. That's precisely why the scientific community requires high-quality, peer-reviewed research. AFAIK, none of the individuals quoted have gone through that process. The few items of published research are then followed by rather speculative interpretations or explanations which are not included in the original text. It's also frustrating that the article fails to recognize that these "discoveries" were all necessary precisely BECAUSE it was a novel virus.
The article doesn't get off to a promising start. It quotes a Beda M. Stadler and touts his comments on COVID despite admitting that Dr Stadler's prognostication that COVID would wither away in the summer heat. It then goes on to state that "COVID-19 is 78% similar to SARS" and therefore it wasn't "novel". The logic of this is stupefying given that a dog is genetically 84% similar to a human...yet would we suggest canines and and humans are the same, suffering the same diseases and reacting the same way to those diseases?
The article also references America's Frontline Doctors (AFD) who criticize other COVID research as "fake science" and yet they offer no evidence themselves of their "un-fake" research. AFD recommendations include use of hydroxychloroquine but they offer no substantive, peer-reviewed research to justify their claim. As Adler has noted, the ranks of AFD include Dr. Stella Immanuel who, among other things, has claimed that many
gynecological illnesses are the result of having
sex dreams with
succubi and
incubi and receiving
demon sperm. She asserted in 2015 that space alien DNA is used in medical treatments and that "
reptilian spirits" and other
extraterrestrials run the U.S. government. She also said in 2015 that Illuminati are using witches to destroy the world through abortion, gay marriage, children's toys and media (e.g.
Harry Potter,
Pokémon,
Wizards of Waverly Place and
Hannah Montana). In another 2015 sermon, she said scientists are developing vaccines to stop people from being religious.
Sorry but, for my money, I'll take scientifically sound, double-blind, peer-reviewed research over anything stated by AFD. I also take with a huge dose of salt ANY "expert" who seeks to use the megaphone of the internet to make their points rather than seeking to influence the scientific consensus through well-designed and thoroughly reviewed medical trials.