Hey, you all. If you are vaxxers, Anti Vaxxers, whatever, whosoever you are. If you are replying to this post, then you are the Resistance.

You don't know the logic behind the education you have received. You are conditioned not to question anything in the name of science. Earlier on, A Renaissance was needed to break these shackles of non questioning through science. Now the same science is being used not to question the Authority. To all of you, All of you consider yourself scientists, that is good. But you know the truth. The truth is you are not one. And all the crippled data can be manufactured, created like the data of China of only 5000ish death is created, manufactured.

So Grow up because tomorrow, one of you is going to be Kyle Reese and you will have to earn the Badge. Get out of this false illusion, open your mind. Ask questions. Even if you are right, you are wrong, that doesn't matter.

Stay warm
Stay safe
Where ever you are.

This is Col John Connor.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

ArishMell · 70-79, M

I am not sure of your stance there, but I do not doubt the cynical misuse of science by politicians and campaigners.

Nevertheless, anyone "conditioned" not to question science [i]constructively[/i] and analytically, was taught to not understand science, for science relies and thrives on [i]constructive [/i] analysis, questioning and testing.

(Yes, I did consider carefully where to place the words, 'not'.)

LordShadowfire · 100+, M

@ArishMell I'd like to add to this, since some people have called me a medicofascist and a sheep, that I did my own research when the first vaccines came out, because I [i]was[/i] skeptical of how quickly they were released. I still wouldn't touch the Johnson & Johnson vaccine if you paid me. But unlike 90% of people who [i]tell[/i] you to do your own research, my research hasn't led me to believe there's a global conspiracy of space lizards trying to force us to take gene altering injections that will make us inhuman, or whatever bullshit is going around these days. There's no profit in a vaccine that doesn't do its job.

ArishMell · 70-79, M

@LordShadowfire A good point. I think there you've shown the difference between "constructive" and "destructive" questioning.

In your example, it is constructive to ask properly if one make of vaccine is better than another, or what side-effects it may have. Destructive to ask in such a way it gives a wanted answer however wrong; or refuse truth that does not match preconceptions.

I have long thought the latter taints the reception of investigation of disasters that may result from chains of human failings, or involve disproportionately some narrowly-defined "community". Sometimes such incidents arouse strident calls for "full Judge-led Public Inquiries" and the like, but whatever the nature of the inquiry I can't help thinking that too many people will reject and condemn any findings that do not give a wanted answer, irrespective of truth.

If it exonerates those the callers want branded as scapegoats, the Inquiry would be branded a "whitewash" even though it has done fully, properly and exactly what it was expected to do: ask constructive questions to establish what went wrong and why. (If it reveals possible criminality including wilful negligence, that would be matter for other authorities to investigate.)

++==

"full Judge-led Public Inquiries"

In the UK at least, major Public Inquiries are now often chaired by senior judges, some of them retired from active Court service so able to devote much more time to a process that may take a year or more. In the past they were sometimes chaired by senior military officers.

This seems especially so if into major engineering disasters like the Tay Bridge collapse in 1879, and the Harrow Station collision between three trains in the 1920s. I have read the Report into the latter, and it was very thorough, even asking some very unexpected questions. The bridge collapse was traced to major but simple failures by different organisations; the collision to the single, inexplicable failing of one driver, who was killed in the crash.

I don't know if the officers were military engineers, but I imagine their Army training and experience would have given them the ability to sift and collate information from different sources very readily and clearly, and to focus on the important without neglecting what others might think insignificant details.