> Public health authorites != some random "doctor" being interviewed or quoted by right-wing media. Prasad is routinely interviewed & quoted by the "left-wing

> Public health authorites != some random "doctor" being interviewed or quoted by right-wing media. Prasad is routinely interviewed & quoted by the "left-wing media". You are eager to fixate on the "wing" of the media coverage, but not engage with the argument being made. Public health "authorities" are groups of people with opinions. Other people with expertise are no more or less qualified to have opinions, even if you don't agree with those opinions. If those opinions are backed by evidence and reason, and your opinions are backed by appeals to authority, then you lose. > It should be obvious that the burden of proof lies with the outlying opinion Close, but wrong. The burden of proof lies on the person advancing a hypothesis, whether that person is within the consensus or outside of it. Citing an authority does not excuse you from the burden of proof, any more than it excused the church in the time of Gallileo.