Maybe they hate her because of reckless articles that are deeply outside her areas of expertise and which are dangerously misleading?
-
-
Replying to @TArchiving @ProfEmilyOster
i would count that as an insane reason. you don't need a PhD in insert-your-favorite-field-here to understand this kind of medical research. humility is a good thing, and she has it, but humility is not the same thing as "just shut up and don't even try to understand things"
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Antivaxxers say the same thing before defending, say
@RobertKennedyJr’s misinterpretation of science, or before misinterpreting science themselves.1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @TArchiving and
yes, they do. unfortunately there’s no alternative. it’s not actually possible to do what The Experts say is best because they are individuals who often disagree or have no special ability to make judgment calls about trade-offs
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LucreSnooker @gorskon and
I’m not sure you appreciate how you are using the specter of anti-vaxxers to create a fully general argument against independent thought. you wanna bite that bullet?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LucreSnooker @TArchiving and
Oh, I appreciate it. It was *completely* intentional. That's *exactly* what I was doing. Antivaxxers are not the only ones who think they can learn enough about a complex scientific field such that they think their pontifications on it are as valid as those of experts.
1 reply 3 retweets 24 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @LucreSnooker and
I often intentionally use the example of antivaxxers in order to shock people into about what they are doing when they should be taken seriously making pronouncements far outside their field of expertise.
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @LucreSnooker and
It's good to see that I made I was doing sufficiently obvious that you picked up on it. Again, don't be like antivaxxers. Don't think that your amateur knowledge and learning are sufficient to be able to dismiss current scientific understanding.
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @TArchiving and
what current scientific understanding are you even talking about? Emily cited data summarized by the CDC regarding death and hospitalization rates by age. These numbers are basically undisputed. People, including doctors, disagree about what to do based on that info
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LucreSnooker @gorskon and
It’s ludicrous to pretend that on every single issue there is some unanimous expert consensus. When I tell you other doctors and scientists disagree with anything you label the expert belief you will just declare them to be non-experts. It’s circular. It’s magical thinking
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Nice straw man ya got there. I never said that. 
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @TArchiving and
you will though. For instance i could say
@VPrasadMDMPH argues that schools should be opened immediately. He’s a doctor. He’s looked at plenty of studies. “Oh but he’s not the right kind of good expert.”1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LucreSnooker @TArchiving and
Your invoking Dr. Prasad is not the slam dunk argument you think it is. He's pretty well known these days for not making the greatest arguments about
#COVID19 science. Also, your snitch tagging him will do no good, as he long ago blocked me.2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes - 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.