Strange thread Are they criticizing people who value real world data viewed in its purest possible context? I can't decide if they're dismissive or impressed by the "skeptics."
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
As an Astrophysicist out of UCL and Cambridge and a Chaos Physicist, I am STUNNED. That this is even a question. And looking at the covid material is a scandal. There is no excuse for it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Because right-wing people never do that.
- Show replies
-
-
-
Bit of a strawman there, don’t you think? Which scientists are you referring to and what is your evidence? You seem to want to undermine science you disagree with by labeling them ‘so-called’ abc ‘naysayer’
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The body of the paper is fascinating. But you MUST read the radically dissonant conclusion. It will blow your mind. It boldly underscores why I continue to believe we are headed into a new dark ages of true scientific inquiry.
-
“Headed into” LoL
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
In order to get published this paper had to say that masks work. That's the law. They had 3 citations, none of which really show that masks work. I'm really interested, is there any strong evidence that masks work? I keep looking for it, but where is it?
-
Note that it’s actually a conference proceedings. Not published in the sense you seem to be suggesting.
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.