Credibility is a funny thing...hard to earn but easy to lose.
The so-called experts have lost theirs...the closer to the government they are, the less credibility they have.
I addressed in a prior post to you the lack of credibility on the part of experts...an appeal to authority doesn't carry the weight it once does. No reason to take it personally, is there?
The so-called experts have lost theirs...the closer to the government they are, the less credibility they have.
I addressed in a prior post to you the lack of credibility on the part of experts...an appeal to authority doesn't carry the weight it once does. No reason to take it personally, is there?
Considering that the CDC and every other expert who talks about Ebola is informed by the people who actually do the research and who have experience treating patients in past outbreaks, I take it that you believe the people with actual hands-on experience with Ebola are lying to the CDC? And when they publish scientific papers, they are falsifying the data?
I have yet to see an expert provide information about Ebola that is not solidly grounded in the scientific literature. Since I've read the pertinent literature, I can tell pretty quickly if they say something inaccurate.
And, sorry, but dismissing the expert opinion as "appeal to authority" doesn't hold any water with me. Scientists study their respective fields for years until they know that stuff forwards and backwards, and they read every new research article that pertains to their field--that's how they become authorities.