Okay, read that... 10 paragraphs dedicated to if he invented mRNA tech or not.
This is not the thing we should be focused on.
These articles undermining his character and contribution to the tech are largely meaningless.
Truly it just further proves the point that there isn't allowed to be a debate here.
Younger professionals that believe the exact same things as Malone are silent because they have to, to keep their license.
We can tell that these arguments against Malone are totally meaningless because of the way they are constructed. If the entire core of the argument has to revolve around picking at the weak points and totally ignoring the main overarching global topic... then what we are doing here? Okay, he didn't invent mRNA. So what? Nothing has changed. It's not a victory or a defeat for either side of the actual argument.