If you owned slaves, and you believed, as did American slave owners, that your position was divine and/or unarguable, would you consent to debate a slave? Did slave owners debate abolitionists? (I honestly don't remember.) Just as important, was there any chance that slavery would have been abolished as a result of such a debate? Maybe they--people like your antagonist--are saving time? 😜

Expand full comment

Imagine having hope that this type of debate will actually happen - they know , they would lose and that can't be allowed .

Expand full comment

Why is it that so many narrative-abiding “experts” refuse to defend their position - because they can’t or are they cowards or...?

Expand full comment

What amazing memes your team is making. PLEASE make a meme of the quote below by Tim Caulfield and another one by Dr. Teresa Tam as well as maybe some of the statements by Dr. Deena Hinshaw.

The first two were made at this Public Forum Panel Discussion, June 22, 2021

COVID Science: Cutting Through the Noise

Forum Moderator: Tim Caulfield, University of Alberta (held virtually through the Li Ka Shing Institute in Edmonton. The recording of the event was accessible for a few days, then taken down. Maybe someone at the Institute would know how to access it after the fact.)

See page 28 https://r.8b.io/387157/assets/files/Part_B_10_13.pdf for the full context - this is part of the Following the Science Compilation of Letters and Research Evidence (Oct 2021) that can be found here: https://followingthecovidscience.8b.io/page2.html#content2-2u.

Dr. Teresa Tam (around the 17-minute mark)

We’ve been living through this pandemic with science bringing us new information almost, daily in fact probably several times a day. And it is challenging and complicated in many ways.

But I think we need to embrace that the value that science has brought to this pandemic including the of course the vaccine but many other aspects as well

Continually tracking new evidence is crucial, remaining nimble and ready to refine our approaches, to shift how we respond, is actually really important. …

Even though it is hard for the public to change its understanding of what is happening

… at the time when we are living through the change it’s definitely not easy to do, but it is the right thing to do and I think as scientists, as experts like those on this panel, it is actually our responsibility to admit to the fact that maybe we didn’t know as much before

Now we know the following facts… and we should be able to adapt our response.

Not doing so will not, I think, be responsible.

We have systems to pick up data about adverse reactions, the dynamic nature of our response and of science

Timothy Caulfield:

Science-informed public health officials should revise their recommendations based on the science, that’s their responsibility. And if they don’t, that’s more problematic. I would say, changing your mind based on the science is a badge of honor, not a reason to not trust someone.

For Dr. Hinshaw, some of the underlined statements on page 9 of the same document might be good meme material - this was from her sworn affadavit from July 12, 2021 (although with her no longer in office, there might be less you can do with this)

Thank you

Expand full comment