I agree with your assessment, but I'm still quite glad that Dr. Hooman took a stand against RFK Jr.'s chronic and expected misrepresentations.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @JDCBurnhil @JaiKanta22 and
Oh, I'm glad he did, too. Finally. It took a LOT of prodding, though, and not just by me.
2 replies 1 retweet 40 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @JDCBurnhil and
I can't judge the science but take Dr. Hooman's side because he is much more respectful than you, Dr. Gorski. Name callers tend to bend facts to prove they are right. Mr. Kennedy is also much more respectful and a true freedom fighter, imo, even if his science is somewhat flawed.
21 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AJonSchultz @gorskon and
JDC Burnhil Retweeted JDC Burnhil
"tend to bend facts to prove they are right"??? You're delivering that line in a conversation referencing RFK Jr. but not saying a word about HIS long history of totally FALSIFYING???https://twitter.com/JDCBurnhil/status/1344444179758379013?s=19 …
JDC Burnhil added,
2 replies 2 retweets 34 likes -
Replying to @JDCBurnhil @AJonSchultz and
Assassinating the character of a person for political purposes has nothing to do with the pandemic. PRO this, ANTI that. Give a break good man. We are running out of time to control this pandemic. Divided and clueless about all the risks, we fall. It’s not about RFK.
14 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @JDCBurnhil and
And here you had me wondering if I'd gone too far in asking if you were a "useful idiot" for antivaxxers movement. I'd even started to feel bad, as if I had gone too far. No longer, I'm afraid. Your continued portrayal of criticism of RFK Jr. as "character assassination" did it.
3 replies 1 retweet 27 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @noorchashm and
I wonder how Dr. Noorchashm would handle it if he were in your situation, having responded to and debunked RFK jr.’s misrepresentations for over 15 years. I suspect, given his behavior here, he would be a lot less matter of fact and analytic than you are on new articles.
3 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
I would welcome a public debate with Mr. Kennedy and Dr. Gorski. When shall we do it? Divided we fall. Together we can solve problems. There are many whose ears RFK has. Are you certain he is not amenable to reason? He is a pretty well trained attorney - and has done some good.
5 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @gorskon and
This call is highly problematic. You are saying an actual scientist should sit in a forum with an antivaccine science denier as if they were equal? Do you really want to help legitimize antivaccine misinformation?
1 reply 0 retweets 18 likes
"Live public debate" has been a favorite go-to tactic for science deniers of all stripes for a long time. I've had HIV/AIDS deniers, antivaxxers, cancer quacks, and alternative medicine scammers "challenge" me to "live debate."
-
-
I never say yes, because such "debates" are not science. They are a forum in which a crank can appear to be equal to a physician and scientist and then Gish gallop to his heart's content and thus appear to "win." (Look it up, Dr. Hooman, if you don't know what a "Gish gallop is.)
5 replies 6 retweets 47 likes -
I've seen enough of debates to sour on them entirely. Debates are not a means of determining facts, but of shaping opinions about the facts For them to work, both parties have to start from a common basis of facts. They never do, so they're worse than useless.
0 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
End of conversation
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.