Idaho: Vaccine ban for thee but not for moo

Politics
#21

You lost me

#23

Ridiculous non sequitur.

1 Like
#24

The scientific method::

  1. asking a question about something you observe, 2) doing background research to learn what is already known about the topic, 3) constructing a hypothesis, 4) experimenting to test the hypothesis, 5) analyzing the data from the experiment and drawing conclusions, and 6) communicating the results to others.
    And if you followed this, you were labelled as not following science. Hmmmmm!
#25

But most anti vaxxers considered a FB meme or YouTube video as research.

And in your scientific method the “research” done by investigators claiming HQ and Ivermectin and other bunk meds as treatment failed steps 4, 5 and 6.

Yet, most of the "do your research " crowd wouldn’t accept the results of failed data in the scientific method.

1 Like
#26

Again - the anti-vac crowd were initially a product of the liberal / progressive movement. Are these people suddenly now pro vaxx? Where did they go?

Also - who exactly are you referring to? I am against covid vaccine mandates, but I have never suggested anyone to take ivermectin. I also believe that if you are overweight or diabetic due to lifestyle choices then your opinions about Covid vaccines are moot

#27

Clearly the folks in Idaho don’t trust the science and want to stop the vaccines.

I know 11 peolple who died of covid before vaccines were available,the youngest was 28 and a marathon runner.

It is a false narative to only believe those who are overweight, diabetic, or lifestyle choices (what ever that means) are at a greater risk.

1 Like
#28

Wouldn’t it have peer review as a number 7?

Also I think many people were doing the steps out of order and drew conclusions first then did research to support it.

1 Like
#29

I think CgrBkr was responding to Rocky’s post and not yours.

#30

And the no mask wearing, no social distancing, no vacs crowd was doing this? Got it. Yep, they were so nuanced it escaped most everyone that they had proceeded through this process.

Please provide us with names of those so enlightened as to supersede the best efforts of virologists with PhD’s and how their superior science methodology was undisputed.

Meanwhile, my 3rd arm is causing me no problems, but I did have to go into the CDC to have the chip reprogrammed that was injected into my arm. They said I’m good to go.

1 Like
#31

Even “peer reviewing” isn’t always sufficient because most scientific research can’t be replicated

As much as science has reached great heights, I think people give way too much credit to “science”. Doesn’t mean we give up on science, but much of the technology and scientific advancements throughout human history were due to military conflict and religion

1 Like
#32

Technology advances are certainly driven by military goals, but that doesn’t mean they don’t use the scientific method.

Not sure what religious technological innovations you’re referring to, unless you’re thinking about Scientology and their e meters.

1 Like
#33

A good study design should allow for repeating the results.

1 Like
#34

Peer review involves looking at the methodology employed and the interpretation and analysis of the data and conclusions drawn from it.

As for “ most scientific research can’t be replicated”, I’m a bit skeptical of that statement.
If an experiment can’t be replicated, the initial result gets trashed by the scientific community.
Can you share the links about the replication problem ?

Here is an article in regards to that , but its focus is on biology for this problem. And the reproducibility problem is due to poor methods being deployed.

A 2016 Nature survey3, for example, revealed that in the field of biology alone, over 70% of researchers were unable to reproduce the findings of other scientists and approximately 60% of researchers could not reproduce their own findings.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d42473-019-00004-y

1 Like
#35

Not a surprise. I stopped responding to you (and this will be my last one) because you willfully obfuscate, don’t answer direct questions (like Legoland), and either feign ignorance, or refuse to actually try to understand the responses here.

Good luck in life.

1 Like
#36

False. Anti-vax has nothing to do with liberalism or progressive movements. It’s closer to libertarianism. Maybe that’s where your confusion comes from.