—> If I am a murderer for taking the best care of patients I can then the other party is a murderer for scaring people off the vaccine that could benefit from and have their lives saved by it.
I’ll revise your revision.
“If I am a murderer for showing up on threads to try to invalidate the shared information so people get a vaccine, I can then say the other party is a murderer for scaring people off the vaccine that could benefit from and have their lives saved by it.
Fair enough.
And by the way, I assume you *may* be a doctor of some kind, but you are anonymous, so who really knows?
You do appeal to your doctor status as an authority while remaining anonymous.
Any claims you make about your experience are therefore unverifiable to the rest of us here. All well and good, but... appeal to authority is a logical fallacy, and more-so in light of the anonymity involved in your identity.
The doctors publishing and doing studies on things like Ivermectin, are fully identified. Instead of referring to themselves or their anecdotal experiences, they are posting factual studies and reviews of studies. Their credentials are easy to verify.
It is only natural to give them more credence than an anonymous poster.
I do understand why you and I both choose to be anonymous. I do not want to reveal my own status as a world-renown viral researcher.
[nah! Totally made up.]
That said, I welcome your voice and I do not like ad hominem attacks by either side, any more than other fallacies.
I do not want to reveal my own status as a world-renown viral researcher.
[nah! Totally made up.]
Sounds completely plausible....go for it.
(Why not? 😉)