DavidAOlson -> RE: General Vikes Talk (8/5/2021 3:17:46 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote:
ORIGINAL: Burns You all are helping me make my counterpoint. You all think your right and righteous in your endeavor to the point of being Pious. No amount of critical thinking from another perspective is going to sway you. And thus, the rub. This isn’t going away. I would never stop someone from choosing their medical path. However, I wouldn’t force any medical treatment upon another based on my wants and needs. But how can anyone change your groupthink minds. You have all the facts and know all the angles. Shoot, some of the same folks are great football minds and can GM in the NFL tomorrow. This site has become overcome with overbearing blowhards. Here is the fatal flaw in your argument. There has been no critical thinking from the other perspective. Just a lot of misinformation about mercury, aluminum, deformed babies, etc. When the other side presents something that is actually the result of critical thought and research, I will consider it. The concept of "the other side" doesn't really apply. For most relevant issues, the best experts have come to a range of plausible conclusions, and the range shrinks as more data comes in. Those experts also offer a mix of more speculative suggestions, grounded on a lot of experience with related situations. You can reasonably talk about "another side" among that group. The anti-vax crowd is not "another side." They're incoherent and inconsistent with well-established facts. For example, the mRNA concerns ignore the fact that the virus injects far more mRNA into your cells than the Pfizer vaccine, and the vaccine is gone after a week while the virus persists for several weeks longer, sometimes months. If the mRNA aspect were an actual concern, and not just an argument of convenience, they'd be much, much more concerned about the actual virus. Sorry, Sweens, just got triggered by my annoyance at "the other side" fallacy that gets trotted out for scientific controversies. One one side, science says cigarette smoking is bad for you, on the other side, it's not. The science has a range on just how bad it might be, but the denialists on "the other side" are just blowing smoke.
|
|
|
|