From the anti-vaxxers to flat earthers: what makes people distrust science?

I was using the term “you” generically. Substituting "one" for "you," would have the same meaning here. The rest of the reply demonstrates this. It was all aimed at that article.

The point was and is that the author is conflating, thus negating influence, perhaps for the better. His model is not at all a good one to follow, and perhaps the same for his “science.”

BTW, this brings up another point. There was an assertion not long ago that one must agree with any article one posts. This is obviously not necessarily true, and it is certainly not true that one must agree with everything in an article one posts.

 

One reason is science does not seem to solve a problem without creating a new, and often more serious, one(s). Increasing the lifespan --> overpopulation ... greater military technology --> stockpiling nuclear weapons ... faster transport--> polluted air w/ too much CO2 ... the ability to travel in space --> a race to the moon costing hundreds of billions, resulting in great inflation a few years later and many suicides of technologists whose skills were obsolete when we quit going .........

 

LOL. Now that's funny, even hilarious. First, you deny conflating anything, which the author is obviously doing in spades in that article and with tremendous ignorance, and then you say you agree with the article.

Hopefully, you didn’t really mean that last bit but only that you agree with it at certain points.

The author actually dragged Republican attitudes toward the Mueller report into it. What does that have to do with science? Nothing.

He sounds more like a Dem parrot trying to build walls of hostility than someone trying to reason with sound science. He's not a good model to follow.

 

No. It helps alleviate fear, not mistrust. The commandment is to not fear those who can kill the body; it isn't to trust them.

 

Vaccine proponents we're the first to advocate calling the vax gene therapy.

 

Richard Weikart: The Dark Side of Science | Evolution News

March for science, you say? Follow the science? Listen to the scientists? Perhaps first ask “What science?” and “What scientists?”

...

As Weikart explains, over the past century and a half, science has been misused to fuel racist policies and undermine human rights. Darwinian ideas helped lay the groundwork for Nazi ideology in Germany. And we shouldn’t imagine the problem was restricted to Nazi Germany. Scientific racism also reared its head in the United States, including in the long-running and infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment.​

 

thanks JonC ... I was kinda patrolling (not to be confused with trolling) since you took issue with CNN being a summarily untrustworthy source.

Yes, the cv vaxed can contract and spread the disease. Arguably with greater R factor (or whatever the statisticians say to communicate the degree to which maximum spreading is effected) because of the apparently reduced symptoms. When most have very little symptom to recognize ... and then are reduced from there, of course they'll continue to be "out" spreading ...

vice the non-cv vaxed who apparently get more severe symptoms which will tend to put them in isolation, reducing their R factor/footprint.

So ... as the article says ... this isn't a pandemic of the non cv vaxed ... it's a pandemic of the cv vaxed because they keep sharing it to more people in a given period of time.

 

If God controls all, you can trust God in people's actions. Even the bad choices.

 

articulate articulate articulate.

possibly. I think the condition of "no antibodies" for a never challenged immune system, this is probably accurate. For one which has already had the cell mediated response ... not at all. For one which has been challenged but lacked a cell mediated response ... somewhere in between the two previous.

this is precisely the issue with this really being a pandemic of the cv vaxed, now that such a large percentage of the population has been jabbed. Yet it's still a pejorative to be non-cv vaxed and this is increasing, not decreasing. Folks are declaring non cv vaxed to be like an armed perpetrator --- threating one's life, so stop the threat. see where THIS goes???

true ... but for purposes of contracting and spreading ... being exposed to the virus will generate SOME response if only the innate level. the intensity/duration of exposure will have a lot in determining the immune response ... obviously the health of a given individual's immune system will dictate the effectivity of response.

 

all the more reason to 86 the mandates. ALL of them. There is PLENTY of idiotic regulation with which private business owners must abide.

being restricted from mandating a cv vax is hardly idiotic. We're not machines whereby the biggest concern is what brand/viscosity of oil to use in an engine.

yes, my opinion is molded by my understanding the jab is FAR riskier than contracting the disease. The only thing in print which indicates otherwise is generated by someone with skin in the jab game; NOT someone with public & individual health as priority number one.

 

most of the private business mandates are DUE to the govt mandate.

... but on this issue, because of the bad data ... as you said, the science isn't settled ... there's no justification for mandating this cv vax. Incompetence or nefarious motivation are the only options. Neither, clearly, are reasonable ...

If you want me to admit to socialism ... ok fine. But this is a mole hill compared to the EXISTING mountains of socialisms with which private business must comply.