Nor will I respond to any further attacks based on similar distortions about JPAI. Data-driven discussion is always welcome. I will also ignore attacks on experts whose early estimates proved inaccurate: good scientists revise base on new data. Ad hominem attacks ignored.https://twitter.com/JeanneLenzer1/status/1372632358235615242 …
-
-
Replying to @JeanneLenzer1
Serious question then - what about people whose early estimates proved inaccurate but have never changed their position nor actually admitted that they made an error in any meaningful way?
2 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @alchemytoday @JeanneLenzer1
Actually, I'm not commenting on that specific statement, and tbh not really about that particular scientist either. I think there's a really interesting commentary here in the divide between people who admit they are wrong and those who picked a position in March 2020
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
If I were to pick an example about this for Prof Ioannidis, I would say his continued insistence that the IFR of COVID-19 is the same as that of seasonal influenza for people <70 years is incorrect, and it's really odd that he keeps making the claim
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.