pull down to refresh
41 sats \ 14 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 22 Mar \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon
I guess this is a good example of the Dunning–Kruger effect. He may be an expert in some areas but this is not one of them. Therefore, his opinion is no better than any other man on the street. If you have see Mark Dice, you know what that is worth!!
This was a catastrophic failure of basic scientific reasoning. I think it's less Dunning-Kruger and more falling for ridiculous propaganda.
reply
Don’t think it was so ridiculous because so many people took it in and didn’t laugh at it at all. Laughing at it would have been a sign of very good reasoning and mental health. I laughed at the vaxx propaganda and blue-haired people, too. It doesn’t seem to endear me to them, though. Ahhhhh…..sometimes life is tough. :)
reply
"science" became one of my most hated words during the pandemic.
Any time someone said, "we're following the science", I shuddered and cringed.
Because when I ask anyone to cite a scientific paper it was crickets.
Because when I confront them that the original Pfizer study had like 4 cases of Covid out of 2,000 in the control group and 1 case out of 2,000 in the treatment group.... along wiht the study only testing for a single outcome and not all-cause mortality or side effects..... and when I ask them about confidence bounds or cost benefit tradeoffs.... crickets.
These people don't know f*** science if it kicked them in the nuts.
reply
I wholeheartedly agree with you. They don’t know that there is no such thing as settled science, since science is either replicated experiments or not replicated experiments, either of which may or may not validate a hypothesis and perhaps a theory. They also always ignore the statistics when they don’t point to the desired conclusions, amazingly enough! Then, to top it all off, they use a test that the inventor, Kary Mullis, said was ineffective and unsuited for that purpose. This is what you get when you have pay-for-play scientists, I guess.
reply
Yep, "follow the science" was really just "follow the three-letter agencies".... or, to boil it down, "Follow our funding sources."
reply
This was a really astute observation! It was DoD and the three-letter agencies that did this to us. Who is running them?
And when things were grounded in science, like decades of research showing that masks don't reduce spread of respiratory viruses or all the evidence of adverse effects of the vaccines, the "Follow the Science" people would flip out.
It really came as no surprise to me, since I had been doing work in climate science long before Covid and I was very familiar with these "Pro Science" folks.
reply
I have come to the conclusion that the paid-to-play scientists are perhaps better classified as court jesters or court historians. They work for the nobles, not for the ”science”! We get better results from people working as far away from the state as possible, and not in state crony companies, either.
reply
That's not even remotely in doubt. Unfortunately, pretty much the entire science industry is closely tied to the state.
"Follow the science" was really just code for "Follow the three-letter agencies."
Not even "follow the experts" because there were plenty of experts, like Jay Battacharaya and Scott Atlas taking the other side during COVID.
reply
"Follow the science" was really just code for "Follow the three-letter agencies."
That is very clever as well as very true. I hope Trump does to the three-letter agencies what Kennedy wanted to do to the clowns in america.
Literally the guy who invented mRNA vaccines was warning about the vaccines and the developers of PCR tests were saying they were unreliable when used the way they were being used.
It was a cartoonish display of subservience.