One of the dumbest threads you’ll ever read.
You should be able, if you want, to justify anti-vax sentiment, or even vaccine resistance, by seeing it as a consequence of failed Brexit predictions and Jussie Smollett faking a crime, but we should be able to think you’re a nutcase
You should be able, if you want, to justify anti-vax sentiment, or even vaccine resistance, by seeing it as a consequence of failed Brexit predictions and Jussie Smollett faking a crime, but we should be able to think you’re a nutcase
https://twitter.com/KonstantinKisin/status/1422181544161128450
You’re struggling to understand why some people are vaccine hesitant. The “let me help you” megathread:
Remember back when experts said the Titanic was unsinkable? And now we’re supposed to trust them that allowing Pfizer to inject us with a Wuhan compound will save us?
Remember back when experts said the Titanic was unsinkable? And now we’re supposed to trust them that allowing Pfizer to inject us with a Wuhan compound will save us?
A lot people seem to believe in a kind of populist alchemy whereby institutional missteps transmute expertise from being the most epistemically successful source of guidance to being on a par with, or even lower than, dorm room YouTube chudstreaming.
But Jussie Smollett perpetrating a hoax doesn’t justify wholesale psychological dismissal of epidemiological research, I’m very sorry to tell you.
I often get this question. My answer is simple: I don’t think combating is necessarily amplifying. I try to analyze the world correctly for my followers and sometimes that involves responding to arguments in a way that inadvertently increases their reach.
https://twitter.com/enantiodromia_x/status/1422565906006298625
“Their passionate rejection of my argument basically proves its truth” is such a lazy discourse trope. Clown level stuff.
https://twitter.com/KonstantinKisin/status/1422549598384664586
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
