the antimask groups’ “idea of science is not listening passively as experts at a place like MIT tell everyone else what to believe.” He adds that this kind of behavior marks a new turn for an old cultural current. “Antimaskers’ use of data literacy reflects deep-seated American values of self-reliance and anti-expertise that date back to the founding of the country, but their online activities push those values into new arenas of public life.”
The researchers conclude that data visualizations aren’t sufficient to convey the urgency of the Covid-19 pandemic, because even the clearest graphs can be interpreted through a variety of belief systems.
The scientists are still trying to do the exact same thing, even in this study.
The clearest of graphs can't be "interpreted through a variety of belief systems" and still create useful results, though, so the "scientists" are clearly doing some kind of soft philosophy, not science.
Let's say you've got a graph of time passing per minute. The most clear graph imaginable: Every second, the graph goes up a second, and resets on a minute turnover. The graph concretely proves with an r=1 that in Africa, every 60 seconds, a minute passes, within the sample data.
Interpret it through a variety of belief systems, and the only answer you'll get is a wrong one, except if your belief system is simply "the data is accurate". Gambler's Fallacy Lens? It's been 60 seconds per minute too many times in a row, it's gotta be different next one! ...Nope. Doomer Lens? The world's ending in the next 60 seconds, so it won't be 60 seconds to a minute... Wait, damn, a minute passed.
If your graph is being misinterpreted nonmaliciously, you made a bad graph. If you show that Texas and California have the same COVID death and infection rates despite completely different mitigation measures, the graph showing such is simply showing such. The scientist drawing a DIFFERENT conclusion than what the graph clearly states, is simply ignoring the data. That's not "interpreting through a belief system", it's malicious ignorance.
I wonder if in a hundred or two hundred years from now this will be looked at as the dark ages when science was interpreted and delivered from experts on high, and the commoners were not expected to understand it - just do as instructed.
You know that line "These people want you broke, dead, your children raped, and they think it's funny"? People often leave off the first part: "When we win..."
They don't say this as an acknowledgement that they were in any way wrong about their opponents, or that concerns about the vaccines are legitimate. They don't even say this to acknowledge our humanity or right to voice our concerns.
They start from the imperative that everyone must get the vaccine (or wear the mask) and work from there. The only goal is to make people comply.
The article is ultimately sourcing from MIT posting their Ls back in March. The writer was probably hurting for a story, although reminding people that they are sane is always good too.
Even my very pro-vax doctor buddy says he now has as many vaxxed covid positive patients in his hospital as unvaxxed ones. That’s anecdotal but pretty alarming.
I am not pretending. I am deathly allergic to both Polysorbate 80 and PEG and have had severe allergic reactions to them in the past. 3 seperate healthcare professionals have told me I should not get the vaccine under any circumstances. I am very supportive of the science of vaccines and grateful to brave anons like you for taking the vaccine so immunocompromised people like me can continue to be safe. You are a hero. Thank you.
If it means maybe saving even one life, ANY COST is worth it. That's the mantra of the masked. If you going dying by taking it, could result in one theoretical and unlikely 95 year old possibly in a longshot living for one more hour than they would otherwise have, then, is it not worth it by your ideology? ANY COST. That includes the cost of your life by masked ideology. The only cost they're NOT willing to pay is liability insurance for malpractice, side-effects, or faulty inventions.
I wonder why that is? People's lives? Worth the cost. People's livelihoods? Worth the cost. A couple bucks a month in insurance payments in case you distribute malicious goods? Shit fam, get the government to prohibit suing us instead, can't pay that cost, it's too high.
this; vaccine is not a miracle cure; you immunity system is not magic reflector deflecting incoming viruses/bacteria before they enter in via oral/nasal channels/injection(insects)/wound(insects)
only thing immunity system really does is says no to symptoms, yes you may carry covid, but you may not suffer from it thanks to immunity system being up to task
as such, vaccine has always been about personal safety, not surrounding, vaccine protects you, not your neighbor; and vaccine is to those whose immunity system needs the boost ...never to those whose immunity system is already stronger than twice vaccinated poor immunity system ones
The article says data visualization is a poor tool for convincing people because you can make both pro and con vaccine data visualization arguments from the same data.
From the MIT study,
remember when the media was trying to say that the scientifically literary right was pushing misinformation by "misusing" data to make claims?
The scientists are still trying to do the exact same thing, even in this study.
“Belief systems”, that verbiage just screams far leftist.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE OBJECTIVE TRUTH IS HUUUUUUUYYYYYTE SUPREMACY!!!!!!!!!*
*leftist commie pinko faggots actually believe this
The clearest of graphs can't be "interpreted through a variety of belief systems" and still create useful results, though, so the "scientists" are clearly doing some kind of soft philosophy, not science.
Let's say you've got a graph of time passing per minute. The most clear graph imaginable: Every second, the graph goes up a second, and resets on a minute turnover. The graph concretely proves with an r=1 that in Africa, every 60 seconds, a minute passes, within the sample data.
Interpret it through a variety of belief systems, and the only answer you'll get is a wrong one, except if your belief system is simply "the data is accurate". Gambler's Fallacy Lens? It's been 60 seconds per minute too many times in a row, it's gotta be different next one! ...Nope. Doomer Lens? The world's ending in the next 60 seconds, so it won't be 60 seconds to a minute... Wait, damn, a minute passed.
If your graph is being misinterpreted nonmaliciously, you made a bad graph. If you show that Texas and California have the same COVID death and infection rates despite completely different mitigation measures, the graph showing such is simply showing such. The scientist drawing a DIFFERENT conclusion than what the graph clearly states, is simply ignoring the data. That's not "interpreting through a belief system", it's malicious ignorance.
Aka "how dare you read the data and form your own conclusions based on logic"
It's basically how the church controlled people too, by not allowing bibles to be widely available in a common tongue.
I wonder if in a hundred or two hundred years from now this will be looked at as the dark ages when science was interpreted and delivered from experts on high, and the commoners were not expected to understand it - just do as instructed.
Would be nice, unfortunately winners write history so that will not happen.
You know that line "These people want you broke, dead, your children raped, and they think it's funny"? People often leave off the first part: "When we win..."
They don't say this as an acknowledgement that they were in any way wrong about their opponents, or that concerns about the vaccines are legitimate. They don't even say this to acknowledge our humanity or right to voice our concerns.
They start from the imperative that everyone must get the vaccine (or wear the mask) and work from there. The only goal is to make people comply.
The article is ultimately sourcing from MIT posting their Ls back in March. The writer was probably hurting for a story, although reminding people that they are sane is always good too.
Yeah I remember there being a discussion of this study here back in March.
I don't even give a shit about vaccines. I'm not getting it because I hate the people telling me to get it.
Even my very pro-vax doctor buddy says he now has as many vaxxed covid positive patients in his hospital as unvaxxed ones. That’s anecdotal but pretty alarming.
I am not pretending. I am deathly allergic to both Polysorbate 80 and PEG and have had severe allergic reactions to them in the past. 3 seperate healthcare professionals have told me I should not get the vaccine under any circumstances. I am very supportive of the science of vaccines and grateful to brave anons like you for taking the vaccine so immunocompromised people like me can continue to be safe. You are a hero. Thank you.
wat, did you even read the article
science over feelings
If it means maybe saving even one life, ANY COST is worth it. That's the mantra of the masked. If you going dying by taking it, could result in one theoretical and unlikely 95 year old possibly in a longshot living for one more hour than they would otherwise have, then, is it not worth it by your ideology? ANY COST. That includes the cost of your life by masked ideology. The only cost they're NOT willing to pay is liability insurance for malpractice, side-effects, or faulty inventions.
I wonder why that is? People's lives? Worth the cost. People's livelihoods? Worth the cost. A couple bucks a month in insurance payments in case you distribute malicious goods? Shit fam, get the government to prohibit suing us instead, can't pay that cost, it's too high.
And as for your civil rights? Hell, they'd hand those over just to forestall an inconvenience.
Except these "vaccines" don't prevent infection or transmission. So other people getting vaxxed doesn't help you. At all.
this; vaccine is not a miracle cure; you immunity system is not magic reflector deflecting incoming viruses/bacteria before they enter in via oral/nasal channels/injection(insects)/wound(insects) only thing immunity system really does is says no to symptoms, yes you may carry covid, but you may not suffer from it thanks to immunity system being up to task
as such, vaccine has always been about personal safety, not surrounding, vaccine protects you, not your neighbor; and vaccine is to those whose immunity system needs the boost ...never to those whose immunity system is already stronger than twice vaccinated poor immunity system ones
How the fuck do you not just spontaneously burst into flames?
says to be allergic to substance, not be made of it
I know but 80 is in fucking everything. It's a magically good surfactant, so it's used in tons of cleaning products and in tons of food.
The article says data visualization is a poor tool for convincing people because you can make both pro and con vaccine data visualization arguments from the same data.
I trust their 'studies' as far as I can throw them.