Libs always follow the science. But science is not fixed. It evolves.
Replies to: Libs always follow the science. But science is not fixed. It evolves.
They only "follow" it when it suits them. And very few of them can understand it.
(no message)
Says the Doc who can't even read reports from MIT and the NEJM correctly...and then claims he knows
for certain the origin of COVID-19...without any Scientific Evidence. Can't get much worse than that.
I already explained the flawed school mask study in the NEJM to you, but since you
have zero ability to use logic, you keep hanging your hat on it, even though the professor of epidemiology at UC-San Francisco said exactly what I said about it.
And if you truly think Baron knows nothing, you are sorely mistaken.
Look at the study again...
...note the closeness of cases/1K in the weeks preceding the lifting of mask mandates for all 72 school districts...then the dramatic increases in cases/1K for the 70 districts that ceased mandating versus the 2 that kept their mandates (btw, the 2 districts who kept their masks on had ~25% of all students and staff in the study, so that's significant)
Also, the students in those 2 districts had everything going against them...crowded living conditions...crowded schools...poor facilities/ventilation, etc....YET, they had FEWER cases/1K.
The Masking Issue has been a political football for over 100 years...people were actually shot in SF over the issue during the 1918 Flu Pandemic. Sadly, this is likely to go on and on here in the U.S. over such a simple task...unlike Asian countries, like Japan, who are more socially aware and responsible.
At least every hospital in the country will continue to require masking during epidemics/pandemics...and I'll bet Baron wears one too in order to gain entrance ;-)
More on Baron...in the MIT study, he claimed that it justified not masking...but I posted the authors' words EXTOLLING Masks...of ALL KINDS, with time constraints in schools and nursing homes for each type...i.e. the Polar Opposite of what the Study advocated.
Then there's the NEJM Study, where Baron claimed it wasn't a study and just an Opinion Article with no data behind it....I pointed him to the full study and data that he somehow couldn't find on the Report...I even convinced Jakers of the error when he came to try and defend Baron.
Baron is simply a sloppy and unserious poster...I trust he's much better with his patients.
Link: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2211029
Brilliant insight.
(no message)
Then why be so rigid and condescending?
(no message)
Your OP illustrates how uneducated you are...by Definition, "Science" is a Process and uses
what is called the "Scientific Method" to constantly search for deeper and fuller understanding of phenomena...all of which results in an "Evolution" of knowledge.
...from the attached Wiki page...
--------------------
Science is a systematic discipline that builds and organises knowledge in the form of testable hypotheses and predictions about the universe.[1][2] Modern science is typically divided into two or three major branches:[3] the natural sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, and biology), which study the physical world; and the social sciences (e.g., economics, psychology, and sociology), which study individuals and societies.[4][5] The formal sciences (e.g., logic, mathematics, and theoretical computer science), which study formal systems governed by axioms and rules,[6][7] are sometimes described as being sciences as well; however, they are often regarded as a separate field because they rely on deductive reasoning instead of the scientific method or empirical evidence as their main methodology.[8][9] Applied sciences are disciplines that use scientific knowledge for practical purposes, such as engineering and medicine.[10][11][12]
---------------------
For your benefit, I'd recommend you also read the Wiki page on the "Scientific Method"...once you're comfortable with that, apply it to further investigations related to "Gender Dysphoria" and understand why Science is evolving to better appreciate Sexual Identity.
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
What does Wikipedia say about the replication crisis?
(no message)
From that Wiki page...
The replication crisis does not necessarily mean these fields are unscientific.[16][17][18] Rather, this process is part of the scientific process in which old ideas or those that cannot withstand careful scrutiny are pruned,[19][20] although this pruning process is not always effective.[21][22]
i.e. Difficulties with 'Reproducibility' don't necessarily prove the Null Hypothesis.
Again, Aragoto has demonstrated his lack of understanding when it comes to "Science".