3 ms·
> Arguing over the origins was completely orthogonal discussion If you know it came from a lab then there's a chance that the lab workers have knowledge that c
by nvm0n2 3y ago
> Arguing over the origins was completely orthogonal discussion
If you know it came from a lab then there's a chance that the lab workers have knowledge that can help fight it. If you lie and claim it couldn't have come from a lab, that whole line of investigation gets closed off.
> they were overly optimistic about policy and vaccination uptake
They were overly pessimistic and were making those claims back when they thought they'd only get 60-70% uptake. This is the famous Fauci admission that his claims about herd immunity were made up in response to opinion polls. Uptake was higher than expected and effectiveness was drastically lower.
This business whereby scientists are always innocent, it's only politicians and the media that misrepresent them, is crap. Scientists lied and manipulated a naive and plastic public deliberately in order to protect and advance their own careers, they did it at scale and nobody in that community seems to care. Smart people now understand that scientists are both less honest and less wise than both politicians and journalists as a group. At least the latter groups have strong internal competition and different factions trying to establish what's true. Scientists seem to behave as a bloc regardless of what's right or wrong.
- shadowgovt 3y ago> Scientists lied and manipulated a naive and plastic public deliberately in order to protect and advance their own careers How do they protect and advance their careers by being wrong?