18911
MATURE SCIENCE
I'm glad to see that Nick hasn't pulled the plug on this thread yet. I've discussed the Scientific Method on this forum a few times before, quite a few years ago. I may try to dig up some relevant posts before long. The method I discussed had at least 5 points and for each of them there were opposite points which indicated when the method was not scientific.
I don't remember discussing this at those times, but name-calling and other forms of insulting or threatening I think we can agree are not scientific. Any effort to evoke negative emotional reactions or otherwise promote nonproductive discussion is also unscientific and counterproductive.
So it's best to be constantly mindful of how our words may affect readers before posting them, so as to avoid getting into unproductive discussion. I think this is the intent of the forum rules against general discussion of religion and politics.
Theoretically, Scientific discussion should be able to accept input from everyone, regardless of how unattractively they state their views. Science should be able to sort out the words of their statements and simply remove those that are unproductive. However, readers don't have time to do much such sorting themselves. They soon come to find the discussion to be too unproductive.
I guess it's hazardous for us to discuss groups or kinds of people or at least to criticize or blame them for anything. Several groups were blamed in a recent post for Covid tyranny. I guess it's safe to mention that mainstream science is prone to making severe errors, as it does with Catastrophism, Universe Charge Neutrality etc. So I think we should be able to discuss errors in the Covid phenomena here. I guess just try to avoid judging anyone's motives.
Can there be solutions without finding someone to blame for problems? Should we try?
Everyone probably agrees that the world has changed a lot in the last two years. It's obvious to many of us that the mainstream is greatly censoring speech and thought; also society pressures everyone not to disagree in public, including most places online.
The mainstream has been ridiculing and deplatforming Climate Change Denial for over 20 years and is now doing the same, only more so, against Antivaxxers.
The only search engines I know of that are somewhat open to free speech are DuckDuckGo.com and Ecosia.org. There are social media that claim to encourage free speech and there's a list of them at
https://visionlaunch.com/2020-list-of-f ... platforms/
Before I found that list I did a search for social media for antivaxxers and didn't find anything. I just found mostly criticisms of them. Until 2020 antivaxxers were pretty much tolerated. Dr. Mercola at mercola.com used to have a lot of articles on the dangers of vaccines. But now antivaxxers are demonized, as if they were terrorists.
So society has a dilemma. If free speech is suppressed, corruption and error cannot so easily be corrected. If free speech is allowed, other errors can lead to misfortunes. People can die or suffer from false info. And people can die or suffer from corruption and mainstream errors. Most people seem to assume that antivaxxers are in error and that they jeopardize efforts to end the supposed pandemic.
Most of us posting in this thread regard the Covid vaccines as the actual danger. The VAERS data apparently show that there have been over 20,000 deaths due to the vaccines, as we have discussed. Yesterday, I found this impressive article. Crisis in America: Deaths Up 40% Among Those Aged 18-64 Based on Life Insurance Claims for 2021 After COVID-19 Vaccine Roll Outs at
https://healthimpactnews.com/2022/crisi ... roll-outs/
I just found something else to post as a companion piece, which I'll try to do shortly.