Yet you could watch it and, because it has got a doctor in it, think that everything the nastsy presenter says is rubbish. Whilst the simplest application of available information (things that have been discussed on this forum) would show that the doctor, in fact, was talking 1. nonesense, and 2. unethical twaddle. All that video has done is prove that, however well intended, it is very easy for someone perceived as an expert to get away with rubbish if they speak authoritatively and wave a respected publication in the air. All they need is to impress you enough to make you feel you shouldn't examine the truth of what they say. Then, because to admit a detractor may have a point would also quetion your own position on the matter, you have to attempt ridicule, rather than logical argument, to distract from reality. You literally don't get that, because you can't get past "but there's a doctor in it". Again. Someone tell me that you guys haven't proven that in practially every post you have made on here. Of all the good arguments you could make, you instead focus on denying reality, like Pfizer telling you that they didn't do any research into viral transmission. And here you are lauding a doctor who believes they did, and published the results two years ago. Its a bit like Reading fans saying what a great goal this is... All you Stuart Atwell's out there better hold on tight, lest you fall off...
This thread has summed up the Politics forum perfectly. Start a thread about a topic, and watch it slowly derail into something else. Absolutely amazing, just like how politics work in real life.
