FAA Is Getting Pissed

If you are suggesting that there isn’t political pressure to bend guidance to that of the prevailing administration, then that’s quite a bit of faith you have in politicians. From what I’ve observed over the past year, they (politicians including Fauci) collectively haven’t given sufficient reason to give them anything other than complete distrust.

 

The only distrust comes from the fake news and other various assorted poison spewing from the science denial crowd.

 

Ah, the science denial crowd. . Science is a lot like statistics. It can be bent and cherry picking for the desired outcome. And it does feed the relationship of distrust and fake news. We are not in total disagreement.

 

Fake news. Cherry picking for the desired outcome is the exact opposite of science.

No it doesnt. What feeds the relationship of distrust and fake news is the purveyors of fake news, you know, the same people who said Obama was born in Kenya and there were no Russians in Trump Tower and Ted Cruz's dad shot JFK and thousands of Americans were shown on TV cheering 9/11 and the noise from windmills causes cancer and the virus will disappear like magic in the spring and China stole the election and the California wildfires were started by a giant space laser and the Texas natural gas lines froze because of windmills and the Maricopa County election database has been deleted.

Yes we are.

 

But scientists do it all the time. I even gave you a real world example of it a couple of times regarding Nicotine. Group A, who was working for an anti-Tabaco group, found that it caused cancer cells to grow faster. Group B, working for an Alzheimer group, found that it increased blood flow to the brain by expanding the capillaries. Both using the exact same data. See the increased blood flow caused the cancer cells to grow faster. Which is natural. You feed something it will grow.

Scientists, unless working for free, are trying to be employed and keep their jobs. So they will end up interpreting the data in the direction of whom is paying them. Should it happen, no. Does it, yes. I'd say the only area that is still pure science, since there is no skin in it, is astro-physics.

 

Fake news. I've never seen that phony example before. And using your profoundly unscientific "logic", exercise would also cause cancer.

 

it is not phony and I've posted it in most of the debates we've had. That being said. It doesn't change the fact that scientists are human. Can and will interpret data based on who is paying them for the results. It's just like how a liberal can get data to show that African-Americans are killed more by police. While a conservative can get data showing proportionate to criminals as a whole, whites are killed more by police. One takes the numbers based on the percentages of the nationalities as a whole. The other takes the numbers based on the percentages of the criminal nationalities as a whole. I can explain better, if this last part isn't clear.

 

It is phony, and there's a real good chance that any "science" that is coming from the science denial crowd isn't actual science anyway. For example, percent of "criminals" doesn't say anything useful when a black guy with no record who gets caught with a joint is four times more likely to be convicted of a crime than is a white guy with no record who gets caught with a joint. Therefore,whoever came up with that "conservative data" obviously wasn't a real scientist.

 

I apologize for sounding harsh, just fed up with the whole thing and tired of listening to mask Karens lol....

 

so you're a science denier. Gotcha.