*runs off to prepare speech
I’m pretty sure @scabpicker was the first to call Boyle a “crackpot” in the original thread, so you might want to split the award with them as well.
I’m feeling overly magnanimous this morning…there is plenty of room available on the award stage.
Yay! I get to win! What do we get?
My acceptance speech: It was easy. Señor Boyle has all of the traits of a crackpot and none of the traits I’d associate with anyone knowing shit about bupkis. The OP described him well, but doesn’t seem to understand what their description actually says.
Pfizer announced today that their new oral medication is effective in treating COVID-19. Approximately two years ago, the first cases began appearing in Wuhan, China. Is that merely a coincidence? Where was Professor Boyle all this time? How much is he invested in Pfizer stock? It seems obvious that the conspiracy runs deep.
From a homeopathic standpoint, Prof. Boyle’s claims have so little merit that they have massive implications for our understanding of Covid-19.
That’s why you can expect to see the name Boyle on the back of Aaron Rodgers’ helmet whenever he returns to action.
Op is Dunning-Kruger. Or Trock. Probably both.
Sorry, what is Trock? Is it Troll + Sock?
Yes. There are a few pathetic folks who repeatedly make new accounts for the sole purpose of trolling. I can’t imagine how empty their lives are.
“Look, the doctor said I had to take up a hobby!”
Only reason I opened this thread is b/c I thought, “Hey, I took a couple of classes from a prof by that name at UofI back in the 80s!”
Yeah - he was a bit of a weirdo back then, but that is kinda a relative term WRT law profs. As I recall, he was best known among the student body for having married a former student.
Of course, I can’t speak too harshly about the guy because he gave me one of precious few As I got in law school! 
Bleach, I appreciate your tone especially but have conceded that he made several claims that were not supported, nor did I look into them to find whether or not they were legitimate references.
It’s my opinion that he is not one who inserts himself into events after they’ve happened. Such behavior is common in the world of psychics but my guess is that Professors of Law, despite being eccentric would lose their position at the University that they teach at due to the politics of others in the same department who would like to see them ousted for such behaviors. If he lies about what he said and when, he would be gone.
Further, I don’t find his claims of past condemnation of GOF lab work to have been remarkable at all.
I find his “smoking gun” to be a smoking gun and that he found it.
I find the practice of dismissing what he has offered as evidence by simply calling him a name to not even address the issues he has raised and offered evidence in support of.
It’s simple like that.
wguy123 & Tfletch1,
wguy123, Maybe you could instruct me on how to flex as a winner when one is only a contender? I’m so confused about what you are now, a simple dimwit, a dimwitted alchemist or a dimwitted troll.
Tfletch1, Your post was indeed “of very high value”. So that you can appreciate that term, it’s the category immediately under the “satisfactory performance” category on an evaluation form.
I’m convinced that ultimately, all conspiracy theorists are anti-Semitic.
Hey Stranger
You have identified my style and you are entitled to associate whatever name you want with that style.
Please see the following.
Have you any examples that stand up to your own assessment of myself?
The evidence has been around for about 1yr 10months. It’s what he’s referring to as “the smoking gun”, and who says that Propublica.org and The Intercept are reputable, besides you?
I’m starting to believe that our OP might be as well. When you are using Bit Chute as a cite, well, if it looks like dog shit, feels like dog shit, smells like dog shit, and tastes like dog shit, it’s probably anti-Semitic dog shit.
Although I’m not familiar with how to determine what “trolling” is in all cases, I’ll bet your comment qualifies. Your comment seems to have meaning but really doesn’t.
’
“unless”
I’m not sure that I agree with you that he doesn’t insert himself into stories, especially given his history from the article that @Jackmannii linked. Boyle has made alarmist claims on all of the recent greatest hits of infectious disease: swine flu, Zika, SARS and MERS, both of which you mentioned.
No, not if he has tenure at the law school. It’s difficult to remove a tenured professor for simply expressing opinions.
Awww. He’s so cute. Can we keep him?