Sympathetic Ears...

  

Covid amnesty …they say…. Let’s all forgive & forget….they say… Quoting Emily Oster, writer for the Atlantic :

“We need to forgive one another for what we did and said when we were in the dark about COVID.” 

That quote is priceless coming from someone who advocated strongly for the removal of the Unvaxxed from both their jobs and society. Bagholder, who firmly believes life is too short to carry grudges, would typically be all in on forgiveness, provided Emily and those like her would learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately, due to the backward manner in which they view the world, they never learn. Consequently, this is one of the rare instances where Bag is of the opinion that the Emily Osters of the world, currently seeking a sympathetic ear from those they wronged, can find that sympathy in the dictionary - between Shit & Syphilis.

    When confronted with things we know little about, ordinary folk - like Bag - observe facts, create theories that fit the facts, test those theories taking heed of conflicting evidence, and then draw conclusions from the results. This is known as “the scientific method,” and it works every time. The hubristic Emily Oster’s of the world can’t be bothered to use the tried and true scientific method to reach conclusions. No. They have to do it their way. They start with a desired conclusion first.  Then they create absurd (untested) theories deduced from their conclusion. They then dismiss/minimize/ignore/censor conflicting evidence…and trumpet only carefully chosen facts…all the while smugly disparaging those who don’t accept their narrative.

  Notice the two different paths of thought. Normal folks go from facts to theories to conclusions, while the Emilys go from conclusions to theories to facts. The completely backward method of thought employed by the Emilys of the world explains perfectly why they are always getting things wrong, and as a result, need to seek amnesty.

To fully illustrate their faulty thinking, consider the issue about which Emily is requesting forgiveness: The Covid Vaccines…

    The first thing we heard, ad nauseum, even before they were released was, “The vaccines are safe & effective.” That statement is a conclusion that can only be proven through testing. Did they test the vaccines prior to making that statement? No. Of course not. So starting with a wishful conclusion, they then worked back to a theory Covid would be irradicated if everyone took the vaccine, all the while censoring/canceling anyone who dared poke holes in that theory. We were then bombarded with tightly scripted, neatly packaged, assumed “facts” on the nightly news, like the vaccines would prevent both infection AND transmission. In hindsight, we now know the vaccines were ineffective in stopping infection OR transmission. They got all these things wrong because they started with the untested wishful conclusion of “vaccines are safe & effective” instead of starting with facts.

As a side note, know who else thinks in a conclusion first, facts later, backward manner? Lawyers. The same people who brought you the Salem witch trials, HOAs, and 27-page disclaimers on operating a toaster. They don’t start with facts, but rather conclusions like “the defendant is guilty” or “people will want to make toast while taking a bath” and work backward from there. When you consider the US leads the planet in Lawyers per capita, perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising just how pervasive backward thinking is in our country. Bag wonders if this was Shakespeare’s concern when he said, “first, we kill all the lawyers,” but I digress…

  It’s not just lawyers or vaccines. Any issue plaguing society today, you name it, will be divided along these same lines. The issue doesn’t matter. You only need to look at the two sides, and you will, without fail,  find conclusion-based facts on one side and fact-based conclusions on the other. Examples include:

Climate change - On one side are the Cassandras concluding rising carbon levels are destroying the planet, and therefore it is a fact humanity is to blame ... Vs… those who recognize the fact that Carbon levels on Earth are at six million year LOWS (see chart in article here), and conclude the world is obviously not in danger.

Gender fluidity - an issue where one side concludes gender is a personal choice to be made, and therefore it’s a fact men can get pregnant … Vs… those who believe the science which concludes gender is determined at conception by the X and Y chromosomes.

Gun Control - Those who conclude Guns are to blame for killing people, and therefore it is a fact the world would be a better place without guns… Vs… those who blame the people who actually pull the trigger and thus conclude the world would be a better place if we lock up the murderers.

Energy - an issue where one side concludes renewables like wind & solar are the only path forward, and therefore it’s a fact that nuclear plants should be eliminated… Vs… those who acknowledge the fact that nuclear is safer, cleaner, cheaper, and more powerful than renewables, and thus conclude we need more nuclear plants, not less.

  Bag has written about this before (click here), but it bears repeating. There are two kinds of people in this world: Forward thinkers guided by facts…. and backward thinkers guided by beliefs. In other words,  those who see the world as it is and mold a belief structure tailored to fit into that world… Vs…  those who live in fantasy land, trying to mold the world to fit into their beliefs.

  As for the Emily Osters of the world, they need to recognize their soapbox, silver tongue, and upside-down view of the world cost people dearly during the era of Covid.  Lives and Livelihoods were destroyed because of the gibberish emanating from Emily and those like her. As a writer for the Atlantic, she wields extensive social influence and thus has a duty to get things right. If she can’t be bothered to espouse only fact-based conclusions, there is a special rung in Hell just for her and her ilk.