Considering Dissenting Consensus

Scientific consensus simply does not mean that all scientists agree. Clearly this is not the case.

It would be foolish to dismiss the fact that thousands upon thousands of doctors and physicians are actively challenging the mainstream narrative surrounding Covid19.

The question is: Are you humble enough to consider dissenting consensus?

Masks have proven utterly useless in stopping the spread of the virus, which should be self-evident even to the casual observer.

In many places, mask mandates have been in place for nearly a year. This was suppose to flatten the curve, but what has actually happened to the case count over that time?

Have you considered how the spread of Covid is virtually identical in places that do not require citizens to mask up? You might compare and contrast the difference between states like California, Florida, and Texas for example. Spoiler alert: The drastic draconian measures in Cali have proven to be an epic failure… Perhaps that’s Governor Gavin Newsom is facing recall.

The real threat to our country is not an invisible viral enemy, but the fear and panic being fueled by finely tuned propaganda. Panic causes a short circuit in the critical thinking department.

Why is it that those who question the narrative, present alternate perspectives, or refuse to comply with unsubstantiate and unconsitutional mandates are now considered a threat to public safety?

You need only to consider the slander and ridicule of Dr. Simone Gold, founder of America’s Frontline Doctors, to witness what happens to the doctors who don’t fall inline. She was simply presenting a different perspective on Covid, based on her well qualified professional opinion. Have you listened to what she had to say? Or have you just listened to the people calling her names?

The truth is, there is more information available than any one person could ever consider. As a result of being human, we tend to drift toward information that confirms our implicit bias.

Given the situation, it seems that prudent leadership would consider the dissenting consensus.