Podcaster Joe Rogan conveyed a “debate” challenge by antivax conspiracy theorist RFK Jr. to Dr. Peter Hotez. COVID-19 contrarian Dr. Vinay Prasad, wanting to be on Rogan’s podcast, sucked up to both, saying RFK Jr. made many “reasonable” points. What gives? And should scientists ever agree to debate cranks?
Search: “how they view us”
We found 1,005 results for your search.
A week ago, Dr. Allison Neitzel posted an “apology” to some particularly odious antivax quacks. Predictably, the big antivax sites went into high gear to use the forced apology to amplify attacks on her.
Share this:
Having come across an example of how antivaxxers think that vaccine advocates think from Alex Berenson and Madhava Setty, I had one thought myself: Project much?
Share this:
Quacks delude themselves that they are brave mavericks who are being persecuted for “innovation.” That’s why they attack scientific authority that tells them they are quacks and cranks as “corrupt” and “unimaginative.”
Share this:
Martin Kulldorff, co-author of the eugenicist Great Barrington Declaration that advocated a “let ‘er rip” strategy to address the pandemic to achieve “natural herd immunity,” laments being “fired” from Harvard. Is it possible to know what really happened? Orac provides educated speculation. (NOTE ADDENDUM.)
