[nika]

I cannot debate a scientific issue with someone who rejects, out of hand, the entirety of the scientific process, as you do. When you use the term "now-settled science" you are rejecting the scientific method and science.

Only in the realm of politicians and ideologues is the term "settled science" used.

Since your opening position-- and that of the mandatory vaccination ideology-- is to reject science and claim that you don't have to be accountable under it because you claim your opponents reject science-- you have already lost.

[bryanlarsen]

Science relies quite heavily on the concept of "settled science". The word used in science is "assumption". No scientist has the ability to prove everything from first principles in their work, they rely on a base of assumptions. If any of their assumptions get overturned, their own work gets overturned as well, so they choose their assumptions carefully. Sometimes that stack of assumptions can get pretty high and shaky, but science cannot operate without it.

[Opie_taylor]

And we all know what assume does.