Far from ignoring scientific evidence to argue for individual freedom, antimaskers often engage deeply with public datasets and make what we call “counter-visualizations”—visualizations using orthodox methods to make unorthodox arguments—to challenge mainstream narratives that the pandemic is urgent and ongoing. By asking community members to “follow the data,” these groups mobilize data visualizations to support significant local changes.
I'm sure every single author of this paper has at some point lamented ordinary people failing to take an interest in science and using the scientific method to make data-driven decisions.
MIT: "where'd you get crazy this idea that scientific methodologies and data ought to be made available to the public at large so they may draw their own conclusions?"
Unfortunately, there's always been a "Scientific Orthodoxy". Normally it's just a bunch of stubborn Scientific Elites hob-knobing with their council of peers from 'prestigious' academic institutions, and it normally doesn't actually get in the way of damaging progress in the real world. Fourier Series were held back from formal recognition for 40 years, mostly because of philosophical differences and political hostility to non-extreme rigor (academic make-work, frankly); but it was still used in Science and experimentation before that with good results.
The problem is that we're dealing with rabid fucking Leftism in scientific institutions at this point, and it's effecting policy badly. It's no different from Progressivism's intrusion into Science in the dawn of the last century with Eugenics, Social Darwinism, and Racialism. The last thing we need is for Scientists to come out and say, "Excuse me, I'm a Scientist and am therefore smarter than you. That's why the facts tell us we need to castrate the children. I'm very smart."
It's not mind-boggling at all. Academia is the lens for interpretation. Even if their methods for data collection are sound (a big assumption), their data interpretation has become absurdly biased. They're so used to interpreting things "correctly" that the idea of letting the data speak for itself leads to conclusions they're specifically trained not to reach.
The abstract uses the phrase "advocate for radical policy changes". Which in context means "opposes public health officials calling for shutting down the economy, locking people in their homes, and completely restructuring society". Imagine being so "radical" as to think people ought to have lived 2020 and 2021 in much the same way as they lived 2019.
The whole social distancing paradigm is a radical departure from established norms and would have been considered unorthodox to scientists in the medical community just 5 years ago.
I still say the biggest surprise I saw was someone I know who did their PHD on the Spanish flu concluding masks didn't do anything calling for masks a year ago...
Of course got unfriended when I linked them to a copy of their own paper on the subject...
I'm sure every single author of this paper has at some point lamented ordinary people failing to take an interest in science and using the scientific method to make data-driven decisions.
MIT: "where'd you get crazy this idea that scientific methodologies and data ought to be made available to the public at large so they may draw their own conclusions?"
Plebs: "I learned it from you!"
"Defying public health officials"
Speaks to a mindset that doesn't quite understand that those "public health officials" work for the public and not the other way around, doesn't it?
"Use orthodox visualizations to make unorthodox arguments"
I want that on a fucking T-shirt.
They're literally complaining that people are using their own data to defeat their arguments.
It's also unwittingly admitting that there is such a thing as religious "orthodoxy" with respect to "scientific" arguments.
Unfortunately, there's always been a "Scientific Orthodoxy". Normally it's just a bunch of stubborn Scientific Elites hob-knobing with their council of peers from 'prestigious' academic institutions, and it normally doesn't actually get in the way of damaging progress in the real world. Fourier Series were held back from formal recognition for 40 years, mostly because of philosophical differences and political hostility to non-extreme rigor (academic make-work, frankly); but it was still used in Science and experimentation before that with good results.
The problem is that we're dealing with rabid fucking Leftism in scientific institutions at this point, and it's effecting policy badly. It's no different from Progressivism's intrusion into Science in the dawn of the last century with Eugenics, Social Darwinism, and Racialism. The last thing we need is for Scientists to come out and say, "Excuse me, I'm a Scientist and am therefore smarter than you. That's why the facts tell us we need to castrate the children. I'm very smart."
It's not mind-boggling at all. Academia is the lens for interpretation. Even if their methods for data collection are sound (a big assumption), their data interpretation has become absurdly biased. They're so used to interpreting things "correctly" that the idea of letting the data speak for itself leads to conclusions they're specifically trained not to reach.
The abstract uses the phrase "advocate for radical policy changes". Which in context means "opposes public health officials calling for shutting down the economy, locking people in their homes, and completely restructuring society". Imagine being so "radical" as to think people ought to have lived 2020 and 2021 in much the same way as they lived 2019.
The whole social distancing paradigm is a radical departure from established norms and would have been considered unorthodox to scientists in the medical community just 5 years ago.
I still say the biggest surprise I saw was someone I know who did their PHD on the Spanish flu concluding masks didn't do anything calling for masks a year ago...
Of course got unfriended when I linked them to a copy of their own paper on the subject...
I presume any scientists in the medical community today are simply keeping their heads down while the activists have the run of the place...
Pick one, pinkos.