General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: ROF Responds to the Corporate Medias Anti-Vaxxer Attack on RFK, Jr. [View all]arithia
(455 posts)It means jack shit when the court cannot post public records of what led to their findings due to medical privacy laws.
This is a country where most people don't understand the workings of birth control and we have laws on the books that require doctors to falsely tell women that abortions cause cancer. Politics and lack of scientific understanding have crept into our court systems. Actual scientific knowledge has been replaced "common" knowledge, which always boils down to people pleading their ignorance is equivalent to scientific fact. Even doctors themselves are not immune to bias and misinformation.
Courts don't always make the best possible decisions based on objective, established, medical consensus.
Pointing to them and saying "see? see? it's real!" is a logical fallacy called appeal to authority. You are shifting the burden of proof rather than offering proof. You present no evidence. You cannot argue the science. You avoided replying to posts that show your falsehoods. You have yet to respond to me about any specific study and have even tried to use CDC links that verify what I'm saying as "proof" that I'm wrong.
You have given absolutely NO reason whatsoever to take you seriously, which is good because anti-vax bullshit **KILLS** people.