> “Nah no need to investigate any more, enough people have said they’re satisfied.” Such a person would rightly be scoffed at.
The thing is, you need a new angle for an investigation to be justified.
There have been thousands on studies on vaccines and their long term side-effects. You can't be saying "what if they cause autism" at this point and expect people to drop everything and take you serious. You need to be showing some evidence first because all the low hanging and even high hanging fruit has been picked.
It's like if you were going "wheels don't roll". Sure, maybe they don't and reality spins around them. But there's a gazillion studies about tire composition and their effectiveness so if you want somebody to take you seriously you need to show some work first.
It has been conclusively ruled out. At some point we don't need to keep checking if the Earth is round because no amount of research and evidence will convince some folks. This isn't a science problem, it's a propaganda problem.
Yes, absolutely, but not just a simple propaganda problem. The US is fully engaged in the Propaganda tactics Orwell summarizes from the Franco era. The purpose of the outlandish claims is not to trick a moron, it is to get people to agree to things they know are untrue to show their allegiance to power is more important to them than truth or their own reason.
Because they aren't doing science. Science involves keeping an open mind to try to figure out what the evidence is telling you. The telltale signs that they aren't doing science are especially evident when you listen to the kinds of things they present as evidence.
A propagandist says: autism surged so we must fix our society. A scientist says "did autism increase, or just how often autism is diagnosed?" I don't have to study a lot of data to see that they're purposefully not asking themselves that question. Instead they seem to hope their listener is not aware that medical criteria in diagnosing autism loosened vastly over the period of time. By ignoring the big change in the word, they can instead sell you the idea of a big change in the world.
Again it happens with Tylenol. There's a question of cause and effect. They see this number that says that there's correlation between Tylenol use and autism. But Tylenol use also correlates very highly to being in awful pain, so it turns out that being in awful pain "causes" Autism to the exact same degree that Tylenol does. But RFK isn't interested in this distinction, immediately pointed out by anyone whose goal is actually to determine what the evidence we see might be telling us about reality.
