Final Notice: I Mean We're All Adults Here

THE TERM "EVOVLING SCIENCE" CONTRAVENES THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

When the author of the most robust examination of an emerging disease, which had examined 19 times more cases than had been reported in the entire United States--almost as many examined cases as there are practicing physicians in the entire nation--says he doesn't believe that anyone had read his report while the world awaits a pandemic they know is going to be declared already, there is a problem.

When scientists at Oxford University post a manifesto of neutrality to announce their intention to retreat behind the walls of academia until the revolution is over, there is a problem.

Deference doctrine is a creature of jurisprudence that establishes a rebuttable presumption, most often based upon an assumption that belies the reality to anyone who actually knows it, like the assumption in legislative deference that legislative bodies actually deliberate before they act. They vote, or at least most legislators besides nonvoting member Eleanor Holmes Norton and Don Beyer, Jr. with the worst roll call voting record in Congress despite residing closest to Capitol Hill. And voters vote, many times without reading and informing themselves about the issues of the day or of importance, and then hope and pray for the best, and wonder why things didn't work out, and ponder how a loving God in Heaven could allow such suffering.

Hidden Figures, the movie about the Negro women mathematicians at NASA, was a prelude at least coincidentally to a pandemic science problem with themes of "Black Lives Matter", and introduced on a mass scale a notion that the science that NASA had been using was inadequate to take man to the moon. But consider this as a daily problem for agencies filled with good enough for government work bureaucrats (regulatory agency deference notwithstanding) forced to reinvent the wheel every time a new phenomenon arises. Is not the very idea of science that reproducibility and replication of results is the foundation of science? Do they not develop theories and formulas so that when something new arises we can readily explain it without having to reinvent the wheel? Shouldn't there be some protocols when an emerging disease appears so that experts can jump into Cedar Creek, push the country doc to the side and provide expertise to disrupt the spread of some new contagion, like we see in the movies, or is life really a bunch of inexperienced morons trying to figure stuff out by the seat of their pants?

If you believe evolving science is required for this pandemic, to a scientist you are saying that an anomaly has appeared that defies everything we know about science, and you at least are saying that this was not the product of a laboratory, which, empirically would mean that a God in Heaven simply does not like you, and Nature is not your friend. Satan may have yet to save us from the aliens when they arrive.