Anti-vaxxers are already too stupid or too mentally ill to be swayed by things like facts or evidence. Engaging them would not only be a waste of time, it would paint a target on this scientist’s back for ever kook and nutter whose delusion is threatened by them. And the last thing that any expert should do is give these nutbags any legitimacy by engaging with them.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

1000% this. It will do good and only bring harm to the scientist.

[–] pieceofcrazy@feddit.it 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If I were him I would accept, but no public broadcasting whatsoever.

Maybe I'm a bit too idealistic, but I don't think ignoring them is the best thing to do. We should talk, and talk, and talk, responding to the same stupid arguments over and over and over again, just not turning it into fucking entertainment like everything is nowadays.

It's surprising how reasonable most people are once you talk to them outside of social media.

[–] BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Giving them any attention whatsoever, even in private, legitimizes them— even in their own minds. This is why they do whatever they can to provoke you into giving them attention in the first place. The minute you give them any attention, you give them power, and that’s what they truly crave the most. Because they are weak, and that’s why they cling to these delusional beliefs in the first place; they’re desperately grasping for control over their own lives in a world where they have no control, and that terrifies them. As a result, that manifests in an absolute need to control everything and everyone around them.

[–] equation_zips695@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

This will make sense if you are debating one-on-one within the context of a well-organized debate. However, they are not looking to debate, but to amplify their message in a well-known platform, like a big fishing net that catches whatever it can drag to the surface.

I agree that people should learn all the time and as much as they can, but they don't respect the science and would use this to give weight to their argument while trying to look as calm and collected so that some viewers would believe that they know what they are talking about.

You shouldn't engage them. You play on your rules, not theirs. I like the analogy of "It is like playing chess with a pigeon: Because it doesn't matter how masterfully tutored you've been in the theory, how sound your thinking and strategy is, or how good you are at the game in general, the pigeon is always going to knock over the chess pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it won anyway."

[–] fruitywelsh@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago

They should challenge him to get a peer review through a respected journal instead....

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No scientist should tarnish their own credibility by giving these grifters a platform for debate.

[–] pax27@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

This is the simplest and most correct way to view this, good comment!

[–] MobileSuitBagera@lemmy.fmhy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Two rich guys who contribute nothing to the field demand time and attention from expert. It's wild that we have people who can throw out a number like 100 thousand dollars as a "bet".

[–] Bucket_of_Truth@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Three, RFK jr is a mega wealthy lawyer. Not a doctor or researcher.

[–] MisterMoo@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

If you’re paying for Spotify, you’re subsidizing this crap.

[–] SustainedChaos@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

If only we had actual data on the prevalence of diseases before and after vaccines were introduced.

[–] gmatkins@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

A standup turned game-show host and the world's most successfully failed venture capitalist are the policy shapers this world truly needs. /s

[–] LostCause@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a surefire way to get stabbed by some Q crazy.

[–] misterhuh@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I remember watching a documentary on flat earthers. I can't remember the scientists name, but he said he would be happy to engage them after they answer his question; "What if anything can I possibly say to change your mind", if they gave him a valid answer like show me x data, he would talk to them, if not he made his goodbyes.

So what would possibly change this cabal of intellects mind I wonder?

[–] IsThisLemmyOpen@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I feel like RFK Jr. is just a grieving child that couldn't cope with the fact that 2 of his closest family members died by assassination, so decided to invent theories to explain what happened. I honestly feel bad for him.

[–] BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

I would if you were just some guy going through some shit. But the second he entered the national spotlight and began pushing his harmful craziness on others, he lost any sympathy from me.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I agree with what @BrooklynMan@lemmy.ml said: having questionable or harmful opinions is one thing, attempting to popularize them or enforce them on others is an entirely different thing and is unacceptable.

Moreover, he's aligning himself with the very interests that assassinated his family members. This is the part that makes me not have sympathy for him. He should be fighting against the very apparatus(es) that did what you claim bothers him, not alongside them as a useful idiot.