Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
No one is entitled to an opinion contrary to fact.
|
The problem is, there are too few true "facts". 2+2=4 is a fact.
"The virus did not come from a lab in China" is not a fact, although it was treated as one for a long time. Now we come to
"The vaccines do not modify your DNA". Personally, I believe that to be a fact. But the only reason I do is because some very smart scientists have said it is a fact. And their explanations are believable and plausible. But I have zero personal knowledge or experience to prove or disprove that as a fact. So I am "choosing my facts" when I say I believe it does not modify your DNA. If think it highly unlikely that the vaccines modify any DNA based on what I've read, but will I leave the door open to that opinion/alternate fact? Yes I will, just a little crack. But as of this moment in time I will state "No, the vaccines don't modify your DNA" when engaging in conversations. I state that as a fact, but really, it's just my opinion.
We have to be careful throwing the "fact" word around. Sometimes it turns out that what we thought was a fact, turns out not to be. So people are indeed entitled to an opinion that is contrary to the so-called facts. That's the basis of how we find out the things we thought were facts are not indeed facts.