Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Medicine Skepticism/critical thinking

Steve Kirsch uses doxxing and the threat of a libel suit to silence Dr. Canuck

Tech bro turned antivaxxer Steve Kirsch threatened to dox and sue pseudonymous influencer Dr. Jonathan E. Canuck, completing his journey to the antivax Dark Side as a litigious bully.

Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Bad science Clinical trials Medicine

Now Steve Kirsch wants to “collaborate” with provaccine scientists?

Steve Kirsch is known for his ludicrous challenges issued to vaccine advocates to “debate” vaccines. Now he wants to “collaborate” with provaccine scientists to test whether vaccines cause autism. His proposal is equally ludicrous.

Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Bad science Medicine Skepticism/critical thinking

Neil deGrasse Tyson demonstrates why debating cranks is a horrible idea

Astrophysicist and famed science communicator Neil deGrasse Tyson appeared on The Highwire, an antivax video podcast, to “debate” its host, antivax propagandist Del Bigtree. This incident demonstrates quite well why it is almost never a good idea for a scientist to agree to “debate” science deniers.

Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Medicine Politics

A “not antivax” COVID-19 contrarian: “RFK Jr. makes ‘reasonable’ points”

Podcaster Joe Rogan conveyed a “debate” challenge by antivax conspiracy theorist RFK Jr. to Dr. Peter Hotez. COVID-19 contrarian Dr. Vinay Prasad, wanting to be on Rogan’s podcast, sucked up to both, saying RFK Jr. made many “reasonable” points. What gives? And should scientists ever agree to debate cranks?

Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Science Skepticism/critical thinking

Antivaxxers attack scientific consensus as a “manufactured construct”

Neil deGrasse Tyson invoked the concept of a scientific consensus while supporting vaccines in his debate with Del Bigtree. Why was his statement about how “individual scientists don’t matter” compared to scientific consensus so triggering to antivaxxers? Why do antivaxxers reject the very concept of a scientific consensus and promote a hyper-individualistic view of how science should be conducted?