Wow, I’m honored to be listed among such prominent and well-established independent journalists as @activistpost and @tlavagabond who consistently publish so much fact-based research, and such amazing researchers as @v4vapid and @richq11 - and so very many others! Appreciate your service of compiling the comprehensive list of independent researchers making it that much easier for us to find each other! Looks like I’m in the good company of friends and fellow comrades for truth, plus I’ve just found some more new blockchain buddies to follow :)

I do have to say, however, that you appear to either be a mindless moron or just ultra confused with some of your labels, which is itself confusing to the reader (maybe we can call it ‘research confusionism’), as I have been a staunch opponent of the QAnon psyop from its inception (documented on the blockchain for you to see if you so choose), I’m the farthest thing from a racist you’ll find (can you show me a single post or comment where I even come close to engaging in racist speech?), and most importantly I AM NOT @HAMISMSF!

Also, I see a few appropriate buzzword labels missing from my description, such as ‘Truther’, ‘conspiracy theorist’ and ‘chemtrails’ which I frequently document. I’m also anti-war, anti-slaughterhouse and pro-peace if you wanna add that in too.

And I might add that I’m not anti-vaccine, I’m anti-mandatory-vaccination and shady Big Pharma practices that obscure vaccine harms and toxic ingredients; and I’m pro-truth, pro-freedom and support tried and tested alternative natural medicines.

Also before I head out, quick question: Would you mind defining and elaborating on what exactly ‘science confusionism’ is and specifically how I have engaged in advocating for it so I can stop confusing science or confusing my readers about science or advocating the confusion of science? My aim is certainly not to confuse anyone or advocate for confusion (the mainstream media does a good enough job at that), so any pointers on how not to confuse people about science or confuse the science itself would be much appreciated.

Anyway, I’d be happy to debate you on any issue I’ve covered or viewpoint I espouse that you take issue with, as all my work is extensively researched, documented and expounded upon unlike your quack watch page here...