More than a 'conspiracy theory'?

[ellal]

as far as I am aware, it's only been reported in the Australian press

Google is your friend

Best you identify precisely my supposed contradictions

I have already done so...

Whether you own up to them is 'your choice'

 

[Vinty]

Did Winston Churchill weaponise anthrax in the end?

It was to dangerous to weaponise.

https://historyofyesterday.com/why-winston-churchill-stopped-operation-vegetarian-e1c0a2176f04

 

[denso13]

Did Winston Churchill weaponise anthrax in the end?

Yes, along with a number of other pathogens.

 

[Vinty]

Mind u one would think ?? That it might be a tadge unsafe launching rockets into space knowing full well that most of it will fall to earth

obviously the Chinese don’t know or to be more accurate don’t care

jeez us some bloke in his house in the Ivory Coast gets a bit of surprise when he finds part of a rocket poking through his ceiling

That bloke should should put the rocket part on EBay, it could be worth a lot of money.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Google is your friend

It's yours also, so why not use it to prove me wrong?

If this document exists, and as far as I am aware, it's only been reported in the Australian press, who just happen to be in a serious disagreement with China currently, then the document considers the implications of biological weapons being used.

If you can't identify these so-called contradictions, or you won't, then it's end of the discussion because it will illustrate that you amuse yourself with baseless allegations.

I have already done so...
Whether you own up to them is 'your choice'

That'll be a 'no, you can't identify these supposed contradictions.' then. I guessed so.
You're clearly in the same mindset of johnny2007, make an unsubstantiated allegation, then when asked to substantiate it, you claim to have already done so.

You prefer the juvenile method of making unsubstantiated allegations.

So is it going to be an adult intelligent discussion, or a juvenile round of allegations, and counter allegations?
Your choice.

 

[John the plumber]

It was to dangerous to weaponise.

https://historyofyesterday.com/why-winston-churchill-stopped-operation-vegetarian-e1c0a2176f04

So you say it was too dangerous but denso says he did.
Which one is it .
If he did why could Churchill do it back then but it wouldn’t be feasible for the Chinese to do it now in modern times?

 

[John the plumber]

Yes, along with a number of other pathogens.

So Churchill could/has done it (your words not mine) (one of you is saying he has and one of you is saying he hasn’t) but there is no way the Chinese have done it now

 

[denso13]

but there is no way the Chinese have done it now

Of course they could have, it hasn't been proved either way. You have argued with me before when I was agreeing with you.

 

[denso13]

So Churchill could/has done it (your words not mine)

"The research was championed by Winston Churchill and soon tularemia, anthrax, brucellosis, and botulism toxins had been effectively weaponized."

If you don't like wikipedia you'll have to buy the book it quotes from.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

but it wouldn’t be feasible for the Chinese to do it now in modern times?

The report is a white elephant. It does not claim that the Chinese are weaponising biological agents. It's a cleverly worded report that says the Chinese are considering the implications. As I said much earlier. it's wise for all nations to consider the use of such agents in case another country uses them.
Otherwise they would have no defence and no strategy to deal with biological weapons.

 

[John the plumber]

Of course they could have, it hasn't been proved either way. You have argued with me before when I was agreeing with you.

Who’s arguing? I’m having a debate on the internet ,dunno about you.
Plus where have you agreed with me .I can’t say I remember that.

 

[John the plumber]

"The research was championed by Winston Churchill and soon tularemia, anthrax, brucellosis, and botulism toxins had been effectively weaponized."

If you don't like wikipedia you'll have to buy the book it quotes from.

So vinty and his link are wrong?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

So vinty and his link are wrong?

You need to see Vinty's link in its own right, and question the veracity of the information contained in it
From Vinty's link:

We believe in the freedom of the writer and as a historian, you must be inspiring with a writing style that captivates the audience.
The reason as to why this publication was started was because of the lack of history publications (not only on Medium) but on the internet itself.​

Clearly, the ability to have an inspiring writing style is more important than accuracy.
Do they honestly expect us to believe that there is a dearth of history material on the internet.
Maybe Vinty is a contributor:

We are always looking for new writers that are interested in the topic of history to write for us. If you wish to apply please see our submission rules and guidelines tab which will tell you more on how to apply as a writer for our publication.​

The founder of that site, and the author of that article is also interested in psychology:

Andrei Tapalaga
A high interest in psychology and unique mind sets. Love to write and even more to read.
https://www.manystories.com/@atapalaga97​

Of course the two issues may not be related.

 

[denso13]

So vinty and his link are wrong?

You need to make up your own mind, don't be a sheeple.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

You need to make up your own mind, don't be a sheeple.

Shouldn't that be 'a sheerson'?