somethingwhere

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by somethingwhere 5y ago

   I agree that using the phrase 'conspiracy theory' in the original Lancet letter was too much. And I'm totally fine with people taking issue with that. And, in hindsight, they really should've waited for more information
2. 2.▲
   by somethingwhere 5y ago

   Why are people not allowed a complete change of mind? If I have an opinion, but then find evidence that totally contradicts my prior opinion, surely I should be allowed a 'complete' change of mind? If we're only ever allowed
3. 3.▲
   by somethingwhere 5y ago

   I haven't followed every scientist in that list so I have no idea how much any one of them might or might not have actively and aggressively smeared people. If that's the case, then obviously, that's awful. But they're s
4. 4.▲
   by somethingwhere 5y ago

   Only they can answer that. The general point is that people should be able to change their mind; and the argument that 'you used to believe something different therefore you must be wrong/acting in bad faith' is nonsense. It&
5. 5.▲
   by somethingwhere 5y ago

   This is exactly how science is supposed to work. People learn some new things and they update their opinions based on that new data. That's a good thing. The idea that people aren't allowed 'second thoughts' is probably