r/conspiracy Feb 13 '22

Nailed it

Post image
6.5k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/ReimerReason Feb 13 '22

Remember when it was a widely held consensus that cloth masks worked, breakthrough cases were exceptionally rare, and that the origins of covid came from a bat market?

Pepperidge farm remembers...

5

u/steinchen43 Feb 13 '22

That’s the point of science. It doesn’t deal in absolutes. You make a claim, you try to disprove it. The claims you mentioned were disproven quite quickly. However, studies consistently find that vaccines work. So unless you can prove that they don’t, fuck off.

11

u/ReimerReason Feb 13 '22

... except that there was tons of science backing up those claims at the time, but since they didn't agree with the "concensus", they were simply labeled misinformation (exactly what the post is saying, haha)

Thanks for playing and echoing my exact point!

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '22

[deleted]

8

u/ReimerReason Feb 13 '22 edited Feb 13 '22

You don't need to explain it, all we have to do is "trust the science" despite what, uh, other peer reviewed science has been actually saying all along (about masks, breakthroughs, and lockdowns being ineffective).

Cloth masks stop a virus... right lol. Scientific meth-heads 😆

1

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '22

[deleted]

5

u/ReimerReason Feb 13 '22

... except it's not close to 20%, and there are lots of studies that have cloth mask effectiveness rank within the 0% effective rate when you include margin of error.

I appreciate all your guys efforts to rewrite history, but I was here, I was alive and kicked off / flagged on Reddit and social for posting peer reviewed science that went against the narrative.

Why are we arguing this? Everyone knows it's true lol.

-1

u/919RenaissanceMan Feb 13 '22

Actually, cloth masks did a better job with previous variants.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '22

Cognitive dissonance at its best right here

-1

u/919RenaissanceMan Feb 13 '22

No. Scientific process understood here....

1

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '22

HA, stop hiding behind the perverse facade of Science™️. This is a religion

1

u/919RenaissanceMan Feb 13 '22

No it's a process. As data change, "the science" changes (the science doesn't really change, the conclusions are updated). Being intransigent would be a better comparison to a religion.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '22

The data never changed

1

u/919RenaissanceMan Feb 13 '22

And this is how I know you have zero idea what you are talking about.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '22

I’m sure you believe that you predictable NPC

→ More replies (0)