• AdelleChattre
    +6

    There‘s a chance you may have missed what the author meant by that. Here’s that section:

    There are a number of problems with teaching science as a collection of facts. First, facts change. Before oxygen was discovered, the theoretical existence of phlogiston made sense. For a brief, heady moment in 1989, it looked like cold fusion was going to change the world. In the field of medical science, “facts” are even more wobbly.

    The point being that facts change, in that what would be taught as facts changes as our understandings change. This is not because the author says so. The author isn’t trying to trick you. No more than climate scientists are faking extreme weather to gin up research grants, as you also seem to believe. If that doesn’t make any sense to you, try replacing ‘facts” with “the things we teach.’

    About vaccines, the author mentions them a few times in passing. Nothing that relates to whatever point you’re making about vaccines, above. Are you saying you oppose vaccination? Or merely that some vaccines have been dangerous?

    • MAGISTERLUDI (edited 8 years ago)
      -2

      The fact is "facts" don't change.

      "Americans think that there is no sound evidence for the existence of evolution or benefits of universal vaccination." nuff said.

      If that doesn’t make any sense to you, try replacing ‘facts” with “the things we teach.’ Ooops, nope the things we are taught are oft not "fact" and if you believe otherwise you have not a critical thought process in your mind..............., you're a Leeming.