• mako
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I don’t know what “brutal science” is but I do know that the scientific process was used in many peer-reviewed studies to understand what lives in our shit. That holds a lot more weight for me than what an anonymous poster feels might be right in regards to the same subject matter.

    Furthermore, the greater concept here is that we as a species have access to actual information by powers of magnitude more then ever before in human history and yet a significant percentage of the population believe that vaccines cause autism because a washed up Playboy bunny repeated what she read from a discredited “doctor” and it caught on like wildfire.

    People in general too often believe what they hear or read without legitimate evidence. Disinformation exists at best because people unconsciously believe their opinions are just as valid as peer-reviewed research, and at worst to weaponize information for personal gain. Whatever the intent it’s a plague on humanity and I won’t apologize for calling it out when seen. If that’s too “brutal” for you I hope you can get to a place where reading cited information in response to opinion doesn’t disrupt your sensitivities.

    • jpeps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think brutal science is implying that while you’re likely right, you’re also being strangely aggressive and pretty uncharitable to the people you’re replying to. See your three paragraph response to a one liner as an example.