4 ms·
If your “opinion” is contrary to observable facts and puts others in danger, yes. Pretty straightforward actually. Those posting this nonsense ignore the facts,
by girvo 5y ago
If your “opinion” is contrary to observable facts and puts others in danger, yes. Pretty straightforward actually. Those posting this nonsense ignore the facts, so ignoring them seems prudent.
- adflux 5y ago>If your “opinion” is contrary to observable facts I'm sure that is the same reason why many once people believed the earth was flat, or that the earth was at the center of the universe. It's very arrogant to think that "the science" and "the facts" are always right. Any scientist worth their money understands the importance of challenging the status quo. Unfortunately nowadays, especially on the topic of COVID, challenging the status quo is enough to be considered a pariah by narrow-minded people like yourself.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- croon 5y ago> I'm sure that is the same reason why many once people believed the earth was flat, or that the earth was at the center of the universe. Observably at the time, the earth was flat, and then you got better ways to observe it, and it was spherical. Then you got even better ways, and now it's an oblate spheroid. That doesn't negate the science used before, but it gets more correct each iteration. Asimov described this wonderfully in a letter, below: https://hermiene.net/essays-trans/relativity_of_wrong.html https://hermiene.net/essays-trans/relativity_of_wrong.html > It's very arrogant to think that "the science" and "the facts" are always right. Any more arrogant than thinking "the science" and "the facts" are wrong?
- postsantum 5y ago>observable facts >FDA says it needs 75 years to release Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine data to the public
- rsfern 5y agoThis should be part of our discourse going forward about transparency in clinical trials, but you do not need to rely on this data to make a rational decision to take the vaccine. There is loads of evidence from many different countries now, and there is enough granular evidence to weigh the potential downsides as well (i.e. take the lower dose mRNA if you’re young)
- postsantum 5y agoCan people make a rational decision of balancing out their personal risks then? For a young and healthy person there is little upside in taking a dose of mRNA
- YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y agoEven if you don't want to and even if you are a hermit in the mountain you are still part of the society. Your decision is not personal it never was and there are now protein based vaccines available so at least you can't use the mrna cop out anymore.
- postsantum 5y agoIt is personal. As long as people around me are vaccinated, why would they care about my health? The vaccine doesn't prevent transmitting In case you are talking about burdening the medical system, why not apply the same rhetoric to smoking, drinking, being fat and riding motorcycles?
- YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo 5y agoI despise smokers, fat goblins as much as antivaxxers like you. The whole argument about preventing transmission is only 2-3 months old what was the hesitation for the rest of the 1 1/2 years we have vaccines available? Cop out after cop out :)
- skocznymroczny 5y ago"puts others in danger", "threat to public security", "views incompatible with society" have been used by authoritarians to excuse their actions since forever.
- girvo 5y agoSure. I’m a civilian though, I have no power over you, so you going on my block list has nothing to do with authoritarianism. Try again.