I used to think that most reasonable people are looking for credentialed information and therefore it makes sense that be default they are going to defer to what appears to be a subject matter expert.
However it has become incredibly clear, given the wholesale rejection and censorship of credentialed critics of the worldwide response to the Wu Flu that most people are simply looking for data to feed their confirmation bias.
Some info looks valid but is fabricated for an agenda. Its hard to know if someone is a shill or not without deeper research into who/what/why the source of any given information.
Its so much easier to assume everything you hear is false until proven otherwise.
I used to think that most reasonable people are looking for credentialed information and therefore it makes sense that be default they are going to defer to what appears to be a subject matter expert.
However it has become incredibly clear, given the wholesale rejection and censorship of credentialed critics of the worldwide response to the Wu Flu that most people are simply looking for data to feed their confirmation bias.
Some info looks valid but is fabricated for an agenda. Its hard to know if someone is a shill or not without deeper research into who/what/why the source of any given information.
Its so much easier to assume everything you hear is false until proven otherwise.