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?
Search: “bigtree”
We found 302 results for your search.
After Neil deGrasse Tyson made the mistake of debating Del Bigtree, antivaxxer Byram Bridle tries to shame Tim Caulfield into debating him, calling his refusal “disinformation.” Project much?
Share this:
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.
Share this:
It was 25 years ago last week that Andrew Wakefield launched the modern iteration of the antivaccine movement.In doing so, he laid down a template that antivax quacks today still follow.
Share this:
Thanks to Elon Musk, two-year-old videos showing people claiming to have “seizures” and “spasms” due to #CovidVaccines have resurfaced and gone viral. Antivaxxers are partying like it’s 2009—or 2021.
