Danoo Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 55 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Instead they prefer assertion and an attitude that science is just a matter of competing beliefs that are equal. Isn't that what science is, always has been and should be though? We wouldn't have the breakthroughs we have had, in all disciplines, if everyone stuck to consensus and stayed in their lane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 7 minutes ago, Danoo said: Isn't that what science is, always has been and should be though? We wouldn't have the breakthroughs we have had, in all disciplines, if everyone stuck to consensus and stayed in their lane. Science is more about the accumulation of information that leads to the breakthrough. Hypothesises are tested first. Papers peer reviewed. Experiements replicated or rerun with the parameters refined. It's not a case of who argues best wins the debate. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danoo Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 11 minutes ago, Declan said: Science is more about the accumulation of information that leads to the breakthrough. Hypothesises are tested first. Papers peer reviewed. Experiements replicated or rerun with the parameters refined. It's not a case of who argues best wins the debate. No but to go down an avenue to test hypotheses and accumulate information that is outside of normal consensus will inevitably face resistence and ridicule. Those scientists deserve respect, arguably more, for going against the grain. It's not a case of arguing louder it's treating everyone equally and assessing the evidence they produce. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 3 minutes ago, Danoo said: No but to go down an avenue to test hypotheses and accumulate information that is outside of normal consensus will inevitably face resistence and ridicule. Those scientists deserve respect, arguably more, for going against the grain. It's not a case of arguing louder it's treating everyone equally and assessing the evidence they produce. But it has been assessed. Do you really think the connection between HIV and AIDS hasn't been looked at a thousand times over? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danoo Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Declan said: But it has been assessed. Do you really think the connection between HIV and AIDS hasn't been looked at a thousand times over? I'm talking generically not specifically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 18 minutes ago, Danoo said: I'm talking generically not specifically. That sums up the whole problem. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 26 minutes ago, Danoo said: No but to go down an avenue to test hypotheses and accumulate information that is outside of normal consensus will inevitably face resistence and ridicule. Those scientists deserve respect, arguably more, for going against the grain. It's not a case of arguing louder it's treating everyone equally and assessing the evidence they produce. In my 40 years of experience as a professional scientist I have come across (many many times) other qualified scientists who cannot live with the mundane and seek attention by straying from the path. They themselves are generally mundane. They feel a need to seek attention by raising uncertainty because the mainstream is too competitive for them to make a mark by sticking to the facts. They then start to hypothesise because it gets them attention and makes them feel that they are important. I can spot one from 100 yards (or 3 paragraphs). Their work is full of unreferenced and subjective matter. I am afraid I have not yet met an anti vaxxer who does not fall into the category. When challenged they always tell me " You wait and see" The proof will along soon. I am still waiting! The dominos are not falling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 Seen in shop windows: Doctors for COVID Ethics 1. Risk of dying from COVID-19 is comparable to seasonal Influenza in most age groups and significantly lower than influenza in children. 2. Up to 90% of covid cases could be false positives. 3. UK Yellow Card shows deaths and disabilities following vaccination. https://doctors4covidethics.org/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Ann said: Seen in shop windows: Doctors for COVID Ethics 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 5 minutes ago, Ann said: Seen in shop windows: Doctors for COVID Ethics 1. Risk of dying from COVID-19 is comparable to seasonal Influenza in most age groups and significantly lower than influenza in children. 2. Up to 90% of covid cases could be false positives. 3. UK Yellow Card shows deaths and disabilities following vaccination. https://doctors4covidethics.org/ 1. Risk of dying from COVID-19 is comparable to seasonal Influenza in most age groups and significantly lower than influenza in children. - THATS BECAUSE OF THE LOCKDOWNS AND NOW THE VACCINES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 1 hour ago, Danoo said: Isn't that what science is, always has been and should be though? We wouldn't have the breakthroughs we have had, in all disciplines, if everyone stuck to consensus and stayed in their lane. No it's exactly what science isn't. Most breakthroughs come by building on the consensus and modifying it, not by overthrowing it. Einstein didn't prove Newton wrong, just that his work was a special case of wider theories. Even when accepted wisdom is shown to be wrong (think of Marshall and Warren's work on stomach ulcers), it's not based on negating large areas of science but on working within it. Higher levels of evidence may be required, but change usually follows fairly quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 1 hour ago, Danoo said: Isn't that what science is, always has been and should be though? We wouldn't have the breakthroughs we have had, in all disciplines, if everyone stuck to consensus and stayed in their lane. Huge difference between consensus and dogmatism. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh G Rection Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 This really is not right. I've been reading a recent report from a well respected sense-talker named David Icke. He's a nice, polite old fellow who is unfortunately berated and humiliated publicly despite making some great points about the ongoings in the world. Now answer me this, What is to say top Chinese government/WHO officials didn't purchase a whole shed-load of fucking shares in the vaccines companies start / mid 2019. What's to say that COVID-19 wasn't just a genetically modified strain of Coronavirus to be released and seriously overestimated orchestrated by top Chinese government officials. What's not to say the vaccine IS just a glorified flu vaccine for the purpose of it being effective against this man-made strain of Coronavirus. So that a big circle of the world's most tenacious business men and powerhouses can make a FUCK-TONNE of money in the background whilst this is all going on. Government bribery/corruption is a HUUUUUGE issue across Asia. There's plenty of cases online. Ickey-boy has made plenty of topical discussions talking about this and because of one famous ludicrous comment/claim (PR STUNT TO GET HIS NAME OUT THERE) he made many decades ago he is now instantly disregarded at the first word of the first sentence. www.londonreal.tv - this is the interviewing agency he speaks to regarding this, and you can watch his 3 hour long interview here. LONDON REAL videos regarding Icke and anything to do with ICKE and COVID is removed from Google searches under "Data Protection Law" believe it or not. DO YOU NOT THINK THAT'S A BIT FISHY? DO YOU NOT THINK THAT'S A BIT ORWELLIAN? I THINK THAT'S A BIT DODGY MATE. CAN YOU ABSOLUTELY, CATEGORICALLY SAY THAT THIS IS NOT WHAT'S GOING ON? AND THE GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD ARE SCHLOPPING IT UP LIKE ST. BERNARDS AT A FISH FACTORY WITHOUT EVEN REALISING? I DO NOT KNOW WHO TO TRUST ANY MORE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 Jersey has stopped people from delivering "newspapers". https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2021/08/17/jersey-post-suspends-delivery-of-anti-vax-newspaper/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh G Rection Posted August 17, 2021 Share Posted August 17, 2021 Just now, monasqueen said: Jersey has stopped people from delivering "newspapers". https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2021/08/17/jersey-post-suspends-delivery-of-anti-vax-newspaper/ This is Orwellian in it's very nature and not correct. Whatever happened to freedom of information and the right to humanity's free-speech. As much as it may (or many not be) utter trough, you should never be persecuted for attempting to share information. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.