4 ms·

Thanks for that! So many people fail to appreciate the value of free speech. We put up with stupid, ignorant, crack-smokin crazy, bigoted speech so we can hear

Thanks for that! So many people fail to appreciate the value of free speech. We put up with stupid, ignorant, crack-smokin crazy, bigoted speech so we can hear the voices of people outside the mainstream who have something valuable to say.

CraigJPerry 5y ago
I don’t know, i mean in theory i love that view. Also, if someone says something wrong, instead of silencing them, how about we just use evidence to show why they’re wrong? But then on the other hand you have, to give a random example, someone like Andrew Wakefield - he might be bat shit crazy but he is smart enough and functional enough to gain a medical degree and become a qualified doctor, a seemingly well respected one until he went off the rails and committed fraud in his research in order to claim an autism link to mmr vaccines. To me it seems he’s not stupid, he’s not crazy. He’s passed the same qualifications as his peers, but he is a fraud. A fraud that has caused who knows how many child deaths, albeit indirectly.
- zanethomas 5y ago
  I regularly smack the anti-semites on gab upside the head with a cluestick.
  - CraigJPerry 5y ago
    It was 10 years ago when “Rumors, Truths, and Reality: A Study of Political Misinformation” was published. Among other things, That was the study that tried debunking “death panels” and the affordable care act. The outcome was entrenchment, more people believed in death panels after hearing the fact check. Since then this study has been repeated 10s if not hundreds of times. That fact checking doesnt change minds is not in question. It simply does not work to change someone’s mind.
- nradov 5y ago
  Andrew Wakefield's medical credentials were revoked and his falsified research was retracted. The system worked.
  - CraigJPerry 5y ago
    “In 1998, a now discredited article appeared in The Lancet which linked the MMR vaccination to autism. Uptake decreased significantly, and by 2003/04 only 79.9% of children were vaccinated. The Lancet partially retracted the paper in 2004 and fully retracted it in 2010, and coverage consequently improved, reaching 92.7% in 2013/14.” From https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/vaccination-coverage-for-children-and-mothers-1#background https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/vaccination-covera... It took circa 10 years for the “system worked” outcome. Can 10 years of excess child deaths due to fraud be counted as “worked”? Surely beyond a couple of years to refute the findings is failure?
jclulow 5y ago
How can you hear them over the noise? Modern communications technology has given everyone who wants one a megaphone. I'm not sure the old calculus really applies exactly to the present circumstance.

CraigJPerry 5y ago

I don’t know, i mean in theory i love that view. Also, if someone says something wrong, instead of silencing them, how about we just use evidence to show why they’re wrong? But then on the other hand you have, to give a random example, someone like Andrew Wakefield - he might be bat shit crazy but he is smart enough and functional enough to gain a medical degree and become a qualified doctor, a seemingly well respected one until he went off the rails and committed fraud in his research in order to claim an autism link to mmr vaccines. To me it seems he’s not stupid, he’s not crazy. He’s passed the same qualifications as his peers, but he is a fraud. A fraud that has caused who knows how many child deaths, albeit indirectly.

zanethomas 5y ago
I regularly smack the anti-semites on gab upside the head with a cluestick.
- CraigJPerry 5y ago
  It was 10 years ago when “Rumors, Truths, and Reality: A Study of Political Misinformation” was published. Among other things, That was the study that tried debunking “death panels” and the affordable care act. The outcome was entrenchment, more people believed in death panels after hearing the fact check. Since then this study has been repeated 10s if not hundreds of times. That fact checking doesnt change minds is not in question. It simply does not work to change someone’s mind.
nradov 5y ago
Andrew Wakefield's medical credentials were revoked and his falsified research was retracted. The system worked.
- CraigJPerry 5y ago
  “In 1998, a now discredited article appeared in The Lancet which linked the MMR vaccination to autism. Uptake decreased significantly, and by 2003/04 only 79.9% of children were vaccinated. The Lancet partially retracted the paper in 2004 and fully retracted it in 2010, and coverage consequently improved, reaching 92.7% in 2013/14.” From https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/vaccination-coverage-for-children-and-mothers-1#background https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/vaccination-covera... It took circa 10 years for the “system worked” outcome. Can 10 years of excess child deaths due to fraud be counted as “worked”? Surely beyond a couple of years to refute the findings is failure?

jclulow 5y ago

How can you hear them over the noise? Modern communications technology has given everyone who wants one a megaphone. I'm not sure the old calculus really applies exactly to the present circumstance.