re: #146 Dangerman

i wrote a long letter to the Skeptical Inquirer when I cancelled my 40 year old subscription. here it is clipped

i think the skeptical community made a tactical error back then:

Anti-vaxxers are afraid of something that’s not in vaccines. You don’t sit down and calmly, rationally “discuss” and explain this to someone, or the world, that they’re afraid of something that has never existed in reality. You say clearly and loudly “that’s crackpot fantasy (dangerous) thinking ” and move on.

Yup. Tried the carrot, time for the stick.

For someone who legitimately doesn’t know what’s in a vaccine so they are hesitant about that, an explanation or pointing to good resources should resolve that issue.

Endless explaining followed by goalpost moving is the sign someone doesn’t want to learn, or is trying to misinform. Cut bait and move on.

The “reasonable apologist” argument he makes applies to a lot of things, all of which the apologist (the person trying to persuade) makes the “no true X” argument, or makes the claim there are reasonable alternatives.

Those apologists (don’t shame antivaxxers, for example) perpetuate anti-science thinking.