Sign in or 

|
PatientZeroSurvivor |
On credibility
Oct 29 2009, 12:42 PM EDT
This article isn't concerned with the believability of any virus. It assumes that a particular virus IS true, and HAS happened, and then describes the course of events that follow, using as much logic as possible and in other places giving reasons why.Everyone has their own opinions about how realistic the scenarios are, but that's discussed in another article! ;) Do you find this valuable? |
|
PedroAsani |
1. RE: On credibility
Oct 29 2009, 7:58 PM EDT
Could the article be more concerned with it's formatting? All bold AND underlined? Difficult to read. And if the eyes are bleeding, nobody's reading.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
spamanninen |
2. RE: On credibility
Oct 29 2009, 8:05 PM EDT
"This article isn't concerned with the believability of any virus. It assumes that a particular virus IS true, and HAS happened, and then describes the course of events that follow, using as much logic as possible and in other places giving reasons why.Well with a screen name like PatientZeroSurvivor, who am I to argue with you? Do you find this valuable? |