Fauci

[Guest]

When science gets politicized, that's when the problems start. If you don't understand science or don't want to, I can't stop a person. Inconvenient truths seem to be a problem for both sides of the spectrum.

Having said this: I'm done. Open up the f$%king country. Its time to smartly, step by step, get this economy going again. 

[Guest]

Gates pocket is better than Trump's, Bill is a much better businessman and biggley richer too.  

[Guest]

@BigAl99 said:
Gates pocket is better than Trump's, Bill is a much better businessman and biggley richer too.  

somebody advising the president as well as congress on this matter should be convicted as a criminal if they are in anybodies pocket.  

[Guest]

@BigAl99 said:
He's a scientist, just because what he says alarms you doesn't mean it shouldn't.  Conformation Bias is one of the biggest tools that is being used to erode political and social discourse.  You can criticize him personally, that's fine, but unless you truly have an understanding of scientific method you have little to stand on other than opinion to criticize his conclusions.  Civil servants are there to insulate the institutions from biases that you fear. 

he was the same scientist that has been wrong on a number of occasions regarding this issue.  was his science wrong then or was he just not using the science?   

nobody is beyond question,  especially on this thing where the "experts" have been wrong or just flat out hiding the truth on so many matters.

I question Trumps motives on pushing for the country to re-open,  is it because its what is necessary to prevent a major implosion of the economy?  is it because of what it is doing to his re-election effort?   or is it because it is safe to start moving in that direction and his experts are not in agreement with Fauci?  I dont know,  but I certainly think its ok to question everybody on this matter and to not go blindly along with anybody since everybody seems to have some fucking agenda besides whats best for me and my family.

[Guest]

@StickyBun said:
When science gets politicized, that's when the problems start. If you don't understand science or don't want to, I can't stop a person. Inconvenient truths seem to be a problem for both sides of the spectrum.

Having said this: I'm done. Open up the f$%king country. Its time to smartly, step by step, get this economy going again. 

i dont think the scientists have proven that they are the experts on this matter yet.   i certainly dont think the politicians from either side are trusting the science of the issue, rather using what they think will benefit their team come election time.   I think the incovenient truth is that we dont know the truth about much of what affects us as Americans and both team red and team blue want it that way.

and yes...we certainly agree on one thing and that is to smartly start opening the country.   I certainly hope they do a better job than just saying ok,  back to work.   we still need social distancing guidelines and occupancy restrictions.

[Guest]

@JimmyinSD said:

@StickyBun said:
When science gets politicized, that's when the problems start. If you don't understand science or don't want to, I can't stop a person. Inconvenient truths seem to be a problem for both sides of the spectrum.

Having said this: I'm done. Open up the f$%king country. Its time to smartly, step by step, get this economy going again. 

i dont think the scientists have proven that they are the experts on this matter yet.   i certainly dont think the politicians from either side are trusting the science of the issue, rather using what they think will benefit their team come election time.   I think the incovenient truth is that we dont know the truth about much of what affects us as Americans and both team red and team blue want it that way.

and yes...we certainly agree on one thing and that is to smartly start opening the country.   I certainly hope they do a better job than just saying ok,  back to work.   we still need social distancing guidelines and occupancy restrictions.

Scientists and doctors are the experts, its why we have a CDC. What's proven is how it spreads, the projections are the variable. When did politicians bother to trust anything that doesn't serve them in some way? 

We start taking direction from politicians on science and medicine, and mankind is on the slipperiest of slopes. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the extremes. 

[Guest]

@StickyBun said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@StickyBun said:
When science gets politicized, that's when the problems start. If you don't understand science or don't want to, I can't stop a person. Inconvenient truths seem to be a problem for both sides of the spectrum.

Having said this: I'm done. Open up the f$%king country. Its time to smartly, step by step, get this economy going again. 

i dont think the scientists have proven that they are the experts on this matter yet.   i certainly dont think the politicians from either side are trusting the science of the issue, rather using what they think will benefit their team come election time.   I think the incovenient truth is that we dont know the truth about much of what affects us as Americans and both team red and team blue want it that way.

and yes...we certainly agree on one thing and that is to smartly start opening the country.   I certainly hope they do a better job than just saying ok,  back to work.   we still need social distancing guidelines and occupancy restrictions.

Scientists and doctors are the experts, its why we have a CDC. What's proven is how it spreads, the projections are the variable. When did politicians bother to trust anything that doesn't serve them in some way? 

We start taking direction from politicians on science and medicine, and mankind is on the slipperiest of slopes. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the extremes. 

but as you say,  when those scientists and their findings are not about revealing the truth but instead used to support theories and the science gets manipulated... that is what is getting questioned.   are the experts working for science and the betterment of mankind, or for the politicians and campaign donors that approve their funding?

[Guest]

I’m out of the loop on what people are saying about Fauci.


I think the only correct response is to assume all people in
Washington are likely corrupt and well versed at legalese where they make
persuasive sounding statements that are based on half truths and preying on
your biases.  I think non-sociopathic
people probably struggle with having a long career in Washington and it self-selects
for the most corruptible of the candidates. 
I think you need to make them show their work before believing each
specific statement they make.


I have a strong faith in the scientific method over long
periods of time, but I’m skeptical of most scientific claims.  It’s just too easy to do bad science, there’s
financial and career incentives towards rapidly churning out new scientific
claims, the peer review process isn’t adequate, and the science that gets to us
comes via a sensationalistic media.


I think it’s a fallacy to put your trust in “experts” when
they could just as easily be salespeople for whoever’s paying them.  I think far too often we’re asked to believe
experts at face value, while they give us the version that’s too dumbed down to
verify.  I think people should put ignore
all experts, and instead focus on the ideas and just figure out for themselves
what the best ideas are.  In terms of
politics we need to stop paying attention to who is delivering the message, and
pay attention to the individual policies. 
I think experts should be focused on helping us to understand what’s
going on, so that we can make informed decisions, and less focused on telling
us what to do.

[Guest]

@JimmyinSD said:

@BigAl99 said:
Gates pocket is better than Trump's, Bill is a much better businessman and biggley richer too.  

somebody advising the president as well as congress on this matter should be convicted as a criminal if they are in anybodies pocket.  

That was sarcasm, it took me awhile to figure out the implied conspiracy, and find an absurd argument to fit it.

@JimmyinSD said:

@StickyBun said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@StickyBun said:
When science gets politicized, that's when the problems start. If you don't understand science or don't want to, I can't stop a person. Inconvenient truths seem to be a problem for both sides of the spectrum.

Having said this: I'm done. Open up the f$%king country. Its time to smartly, step by step, get this economy going again. 

i dont think the scientists have proven that they are the experts on this matter yet.   i certainly dont think the politicians from either side are trusting the science of the issue, rather using what they think will benefit their team come election time.   I think the incovenient truth is that we dont know the truth about much of what affects us as Americans and both team red and team blue want it that way.

and yes...we certainly agree on one thing and that is to smartly start opening the country.   I certainly hope they do a better job than just saying ok,  back to work.   we still need social distancing guidelines and occupancy restrictions.

Scientists and doctors are the experts, its why we have a CDC. What's proven is how it spreads, the projections are the variable. When did politicians bother to trust anything that doesn't serve them in some way? 

We start taking direction from politicians on science and medicine, and mankind is on the slipperiest of slopes. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the extremes. 

but as you say,  when those scientists and their findings are not about revealing the truth but instead used to support theories and the science gets manipulated... that is what is getting questioned.   are the experts working for science and the betterment of mankind, or for the politicians and campaign donors that approve their funding?

[Guest]

@BigAl99 said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@BigAl99 said:
Gates pocket is better than Trump's, Bill is a much better businessman and biggley richer too.  

somebody advising the president as well as congress on this matter should be convicted as a criminal if they are in anybodies pocket.  

That was sarcasm, it took me awhile to figure out the implied conspiracy, and find an absurd argument to fit it.

@JimmyinSD said:

@StickyBun said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@StickyBun said:
When science gets politicized, that's when the problems start. If you don't understand science or don't want to, I can't stop a person. Inconvenient truths seem to be a problem for both sides of the spectrum.

Having said this: I'm done. Open up the f$%king country. Its time to smartly, step by step, get this economy going again. 

i dont think the scientists have proven that they are the experts on this matter yet.   i certainly dont think the politicians from either side are trusting the science of the issue, rather using what they think will benefit their team come election time.   I think the incovenient truth is that we dont know the truth about much of what affects us as Americans and both team red and team blue want it that way.

and yes...we certainly agree on one thing and that is to smartly start opening the country.   I certainly hope they do a better job than just saying ok,  back to work.   we still need social distancing guidelines and occupancy restrictions.

Scientists and doctors are the experts, its why we have a CDC. What's proven is how it spreads, the projections are the variable. When did politicians bother to trust anything that doesn't serve them in some way? 

We start taking direction from politicians on science and medicine, and mankind is on the slipperiest of slopes. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the extremes. 

but as you say,  when those scientists and their findings are not about revealing the truth but instead used to support theories and the science gets manipulated... that is what is getting questioned.   are the experts working for science and the betterment of mankind, or for the politicians and campaign donors that approve their funding?

Have you spoken with many Scientists?  You often have to have a really good understanding of the topic, before you can really understand what they say.  In your eyes how are you proven to be an expert in a scientific field.  When I hear him speaking about future scenarios I know he is talking about probability statements, not promises about miracles happening to make you feel confidant.