[cxr]

The results of Millikan's oil drop experiment were settled. They were also wrong.

Calling for people to not subject fact claims to scrutiny because they're considered settled is not a pro-science position. It's anti-science.

Matters of science don't need anyone to come to the universe's aid by telling people to give it a rest. They'll hold up.

[jordanpg]

There is a difference between the results of one experiment in a narrow subfield, and the results of an uncountable number of experiments across disciplines and time.

There is a difference "subjecting fact claims to scrutiny" and people without scientific training weighing in on scientific questions.

Most people on this forum would have no problem mocking someone who believed their cell phone worked by magic. Somehow the logic is different when the topic is vaccines.

[cxr]

> people without scientific training weighing in on scientific questions

Tell Faraday.

What is the end goal? What you're describing carries a non-zero risk but provides zero benefit. To repeat: science by its nature doesn't need anyone to ensure the scales are tipped in its favor. They're welded into that position.

> Most people on this forum would have no problem mocking someone who believed their cell phone worked by magic

Should they? If you're doing something for sport, then be honest about it. Don't couch it in pro-science terms when actual belief goes the other way just because circumstances mean you can get by without having to show your work this time.

> Somehow the logic is different when the topic is vaccines.

This is pretty blatantly dipping a toe into waters of both strawmanning and ad hominem. Stop trying to read between the lines. It's not helping you get the right answer here. (I'm vaccinated. Cast your insults and aspersions somewhere else.)