Skip to content
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
gorskon's profile
David Gorski, MD, PhD
David Gorski, MD, PhD
David Gorski, MD, PhD
Verified account
@gorskon

Tweets

David Gorski, MD, PhDVerified account

@gorskon

Surgeon/scientist promoting science in medicine and exposing quackery. Editor of Science-Based Medicine. My opinions do NOT represent those of my employers.

Michigan, USA
sciencebasedmedicine.org
Joined October 2009

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      David Gorski, MD, PhD Retweeted Elijah

      This is the single most awesomely clueless example of someone who didn’t actually read beyond the title of the post or, if he did read it, totally missed the point of the post. 1/https://twitter.com/PanTransHuman/status/1210418184433487872 …

      David Gorski, MD, PhD added,

      Elijah @PanTransHuman
      Replying to @gorskon @PumpknSpiceSoul and 2 others
      Mr. Gorski, Are you aware your implication that anyone who challenges the idea of an "unquestionable" scientific consensus is a quack.. is itself unscientific, logically fallacious circular reasoning? You consider yourself a priest of Science, capital S, the religious faith? 🙂 pic.twitter.com/jagMt3DEKU
      8 replies 11 retweets 65 likes
      Show this thread
    2. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      Here’s a hint. Nowhere did I propose the idea of an “unquestionable scientific consensus.” I merely said that if you question a scientific consensus without strong evidence or rationale, scientists are under no obligation to take your challenge seriously. 2/

      2 replies 1 retweet 34 likes
      Show this thread
    3. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      Actually, the post was not about any specific scientific consensus, but rather about a common refrain from people like Michael Crichton, “There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.” This is BS. 3/

      3 replies 1 retweet 26 likes
      Show this thread
    4. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      After all, what is a scientific theory but, to put it most simply, a scientific consensus about the best current explanation for a natural phenomenon? Here’s the original post, for reference. 4/https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/hostility-towards-scientific-consensus-a-red-flag-identifying-a-crank-or-quack/ …

      1 reply 0 retweets 27 likes
      Show this thread
    5. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      Of course, questioning the consensus is often necessary in science. Indeed, it is critical to scientific advancement. 5/

      1 reply 0 retweets 24 likes
      Show this thread
    6. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      However, there is a huge difference between questioning a current consensus and producing the data and experimental evidence to show that there is a real scientific reason to question it, and JAQing off about science. 6/

      1 reply 2 retweets 26 likes
      Show this thread
    7. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      Raising spurious or already answered questions about a scientific finding or theory one doesn’t like, belongs to the province of cranks and denialists, like creationists, antivaxxers, quacks, and climate science denialists. 7/

      1 reply 2 retweets 26 likes
      Show this thread
    8. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      When you have an actual scientifically valid reason, based on science, evidence, experimentation, and observational evidence, to think that the current scientific consensus about something is in error, then it is appropriate to challenge the scientific consensus. 8/

      2 replies 1 retweet 25 likes
      Show this thread
      David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

      When you don’t, then it isn’t. Guess which category antivaxxers, creationists, quacks, and climate science deniers fall into? 9/

      4:34 AM - 27 Dec 2019
      • 23 Likes
      • EU_sciencegeek Shelleybleu Alex Newgrosh Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All Typical Antifa Communist Tyrant Gary Bowering Paranor001 Coco Cactuar512
      1 reply 0 retweets 23 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

          Basically, you have the “right” to “challenge” any scientific consensus you like, but scientists are under no obligation to take you seriously if you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about. 10/https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/on-the-right-to-challenge-a-medical-or-scientific-consensus/ …

          2 replies 2 retweets 28 likes
          Show this thread
        3. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

          Think of it this way: What’s more likely to be closer to the truth, a scientific consensus based on mountains of evidence, or the rantings of an antivaxxer, creationist, quack, or climate science denier? 11/

          2 replies 1 retweet 33 likes
          Show this thread
        4. David Gorski, MD, PhD‏Verified account @gorskon 27 Dec 2019

          I’ll conclude with a quote from Michael Shermer: “For every Galileo shown the instruments of torture for advocating scientific truth, there are a thousand (or ten thousand) unknowns whose ‘truths’ never pass scientific muster with other scientists.” 12/12

          2 replies 0 retweets 30 likes
          Show this thread
        5. End of 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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info