OP insinuated that Robert Malone obviously isn't against vaccination as he's dedicated his career to the research and development of vaccines. This is the "straw man" fallacy I was referring to - you changed OP's statement to make an adjacent statement. As it happens, this assertion is also why I pointed out argumentum ad populum - you used a logical fallacy to categorically condemn a group, "y'all", suggesting that you and your group are obviously more intelligent and in the right.
Moving on, I may have worded my response poorly - I wanted to diffuse the situation. When I stated that you must have taken my statement as a personal attack, what I intended to communicate was that it wasn't a personal attack. I don't mean that that is what you've done, just that I believe it may play a factor in your stance. I do not take issue with your comments and I apologize if my responses have been unclear - I have a tendency to be brief over text.