Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You want to talk about epidemiology and the response to the pandemic of 2020, fine, go right ahead. But "science" is massively larger than that, and your attempt at denigrating the scientific method is ludicrous and laughably ironic.
Meanwhile here in the EU we've just started to approve Ivermectin for both outpatient and hospital therapy because the available scientific data since March 2020 is so overwhelmingly positive. It works, period: https://trialsitenews.com/slovakia-b...d-19-patients/
The US is corrupted to the core. I'm not surprized that there is a growing majority of Americans who can't trust "science" blindly anymore.
You want to talk about epidemiology and the response to the pandemic of 2020, fine, go right ahead. But "science" is massively larger than that, and your attempt at denigrating the scientific method is ludicrous and laughably ironic.
I have not denigrated scientific method, the scientific community has. It is no longer applied, at least not in a meaningful form.
To believe in science, one has to have an open mind and be willing to challenge and change your beliefs based on test results. Not everybody is happy with that level of uncertainty.
The alternative is what? Believing what you want? When you see replicated & large studies, over & over, you have more proof of the validity of the study.
Last edited by Nanny Goat; 02-05-2021 at 01:10 PM..
ya we are too busy polluting the two essential needs in life: water and air. we have pointed to the global warming unicorn so that we can avoid the actual controllable issues. its all about $.
we are so lazy in real life we have to exercise to offset it.
we are going to throw trillions at "global warming" meanwhile dumping "exceptable levels" of toxins in every body of water. we have a new continent, garbage island. anyone throwing any money at that or are we going to send people to live on it?
we think nothing of the REAL issues that we CAN do something about while disscussing to death our carbon footprint.
so pardon us unintelligent simple folk for not trusting science and government.
this covid debacle is that proverbial straw. i do research and listen to everyone, regardless of who they are. when you do that, the truth is in there somewhere. you HAVE to engage though and most dont care to.
the ONLY thing i believe prevents spread is distance. period. if my mask does not protect ME, please do not tell me it protects YOU. thats magical thinking. literally. its all for show. its why covid IS SO BAD. people lean in closer to talk which they would not do. people project more, which they would not do. people PULL IT DOWN TO TALK. etc., etc.,
science is never right in its infacy on a topic. and the dems touting their love of it is hypocrisy at its best.
I pardon the unintelligent simple folk but only until they have a grasp of what constitutes scientific understanding, and then they decide to reject it.
Science congeals observations about nature. It is not in itself an instrument of public policy. Policy considers cost-benefit trades that verge beyond scientific question. What we presently face, is not disingenuous scientists or a corrupt scientific apparatus, but systematically unwise and specious policy decisions, for which the justification is unwisely and speciously ascribed to science.
Science can inform questions such as how many lives are potentially saved, if normal social activity is curtailed by some amount. Science says nothing about whether this savings is worthwhile.
Science may be correct, in telling me that ice-cream and donuts raise my cholesterol etc., increasing likelihood of heart-disease, and statistically shortening my lifespan by say 3 years. I don't disbelieve that. But I'd rather eat ice-cream and donuts, knowing that my lifespan would be (on average) 3 years shorter. I don't disbelieve the science, but I willingly and willfully disregard it, for making my personal policy.
I know someone who is a world renowned expert on a certain insect that is integral to life on earth. He is literally the smartest person you would ever want to meet when it comes to insects and plant life. However he is very narrowly focused on the information he will accept to base his findings and tends to only use govt. supplied & Ivy League (govt. or business funded) research & statistics - won't even consider information that is not vetted by renowned academics. He says that he is required to use the information supplied to him and from those sources as part of his research grants. Someone looking at things that way can never take into consideration alternatives. He is one of these people who thinks that we are in for a catastrophic climate event caused by global warming (7.5 years left) - when the hard data of the cyclical nature of earth temps shows we are actually cooling. I am sure that his research is in a small part used as evidence for the push for Greener economy - but someone else would arrive at different conclusions if other broader based factual evidence was used. So you can see the dilemma which precludes findings that may be more reality based. Objectivity is thrown out the window.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
