Can you please give me a good response?

  • Kinetix
    link
    42 years ago

    And yet another problem with antivaxxers - refusal to read unless it fits their narrative.

    Sorry, try again.

    • मुक्त
      link
      fedilink
      02 years ago

      “Narrative” doesn’t come from anti-establishment folks like me. Our job is to point to holes in the narrative. Ontology 101.

      And I don’t need to “try” anything, including vaccines. You can take your jab. Or jabs. Mix and match them, whatever.

      • Kinetix
        link
        12 years ago

        “Narrative” doesn’t come from anti-establishment folks like me. Our job is to point to holes in the narrative. Ontology 101.

        “Contrarian” is the word you’re looking for.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          22 years ago

          Is being contrarian a good or a bad thing? Sounds like you think it’s a bad thing.

          I used to think it’s neither. Some people naturally go with the crowd, some go against it. Going against it doesn’t make you a free thinker, it’s just a different tendency.

          But now I think that being a contrarian starts off that way, as just a neutral natural tendency. But it forces you to frequently think deeply about things, because you keep getting in arguments. If you agree with most people you never have to think deeply about anything.

          So now I think contrarians are crucial to society, and we should all try to be contradict our natures by engaging seriously (not condescendingly) with them. It foces us to also think deeply about things.

                • मुक्त
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -22 years ago

                  It takes one Galelio to prove entire church wrong, even if church takes 4 centuries to accept that he was right all along.

                  If argument by numbers is your best argument, you need to read more. Much more.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    12 years ago

                    the church consensus is entirely belief based. they don’t operate on science, they can’t, it invalidates their existence. your example is not comparable.

                    if numerous independent scientists fulfill experiments and consistently arrive on the same theoretical consensus, any alternative hypothesis is invalidated until proven. you BELIEVE in something that is unproven and there is no theoretical evidence to support your belief. You need an idea as to why, and experiments to prove it consistently, before it can be presented. basically, what you are spouting right now is a belief you mistake for facts, as anecdotes are not evidence. correlation is not the same as causation.

                  • Kinetix
                    link
                    12 years ago

                    Tell us more about how reading more anecdotes is helpful and productive.

                    Do you have a point in any of your whataboutism nitpickings? You deny all the evidence in front of you and what, would like to sit around for 40 years to wait for what YOU consider a body of evidence to get prepared for this virus?

                    Or is there some other point?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            Having a healthy dose of skepticism is always a good thing. It leads to asking questions and hopefully getting answers when applied EQUALLY to both sides of the argument.

            The issue here is that you are looking for AFFIRMATION rather than INFORMATION.

            • मुक्त
              link
              fedilink
              12 years ago

              I am looking for neither. Check my other replies. I am the one INFORMING, supplying bulk of primary information from good quality sources.

          • Kinetix
            link
            12 years ago

            Deluded.

            The body of evidence is clear, there’s really nothing for one to be skeptical of at this point. It’s like calling a flat earther a skeptic. You can title it what you want, but it’s delusion.

            • मुक्त
              link
              fedilink
              02 years ago

              Lol!
              Even if you are supporting vaccination, you need to be aware that the body of evidence is incomplete without phase-4 data, and long term studies of after effects. The CDC once took 27 years to decide that a particular vaccine was making the subjects more susceptible to another serious disease.

              • Kinetix
                link
                02 years ago

                Yes, you should not get the COVID vaccines because there might possibly somewhere somehow be an outlying case that you should be afraid of.

                COVID is perfectly safe to catch and really does nothing harmful to you whatsoever. Spreading COVID is also "the right thing to do"™.

                lolicopters!