Mar 18·edited Mar 18

Aaron, you write:

"I’m not anti-mask, was happy to wear one... Yet it’s very obvious that we were lied to by our ostensible public health authorities..."

Well, a significant portion of that lying was *about masks*, so maybe you should be anti. It turns out that there's been a small but steady stream of studies over the decades that show masks don't really have any statistically valid benefit, not even in surgical settings. And no, I wasn't aware of them either until quite recently, but it certainly gives me pause about the entire corpus of received "scientific" wisdom; instead we ought perhaps to be paying more attention to John Ioannidis of "replication crisis" fame, and calling for more transparency, openness, and especially for wide dissemination of negative results.

Expand full comment

Great thoughts. As you call out, there is a legitimate point in what Noll is saying, which I suggested that Mabry ought to have spent more time addressing in his review. It's easy to get into a mode in which our suspicions about Noll's loyalties, his conformity to the pattern of the world, cause us to entirely dismiss his legitimate points.

What it sounds like is really needed is for more of us whose loyalties are less dubious to address the problem that Noll perceived and the possible remedies for it. I'm hopeful that your project here can continue to contribute good insights on the matter.

Expand full comment
Mar 16·edited Mar 16

It wasn't just that people were right to question what we were being told, it was that when you did question what we were being told you were banned from social media and in some cases fired from your job. In more extreme cases, people were cutoff from the financial system. Mea culpas from people who had actual power, even in small areas have been very rare. Men like Noll and Collins either completely lack introspection or have become totally power hungry and really believe the average person has no right to question them. You see this in issues like the proposed ban on gas stoves. They float a radical policy and get a couple of stories about it mainstream news sources. If the push back is low they proceed. If it is heavy they swear they had no intention of doing what they proposed and gaslight their critics. Behind the scenes, they continue working towards their original proposal.

By the way, if you can look back on what happened and still be proud you wore a cloth mask that did nothing but virtue signal and happy you have had three shots of a worthless at best vaccine, you aren't pro science, in the sense you support the scientific method, you are pro "Science," as elites have turned it into a religion.

Expand full comment

“ These evangelicals have been least likely to seek vaccination against the coronavirus, least likely to believe that evolutionary science actually describes the development of species, and least likely to believe that the planet is really warming up because of human activity.”

They’re 3 for 3! Not too shabby.

More on Collins’ Babylonian roots here, you just know what he’d have been telling Daniel:


Expand full comment