Anti-maskers recognize that official “science” is biased

The difference between anti-maskers and those who believe everything the government tells them is that the former tends toward critical thinking as opposed to blind allegiance and obedience.

Just because Fauci says that Chinese Virus injections are “healthy” and “safe” does not automatically mean that this is true. To Branch Covidians, though, anything Fauci says is true because Fauci is a “doctor” and a “scientist” who gets a lot of airtime on television.

“[Anti-maskers] are highly reflexive about the inherently biased nature of any analysis, and resent what they view as the arrogant self-righteousness of scientific elites,” the MIT experts found about those in the skeptics group.

“Many of the users believe that the most important metrics are missing from government-released data.”

One of the users wrote in the group that coding data is “a big deal,” and that such definitions “should be offered transparently by every state.”

“Without a national guideline – we are left with this mess,” this same user added.

Others questioned the lack of government transparency concerning data collection systems, many of which lack honesty and thus erode trust from both government institutions and the datasets they release.

“In fact, there are multiple threads every week where users debate how representative the data are of the population given the increased rate of testing across many states,” the MIT researchers learned about the group.

The MIT study clearly states that anti-mask people are “grounded in more scientific rigor” than the Branch Covidians, “not less.”

“These individuals as a whole are extremely willing to help others who have trouble interpreting graphs with multiple forms of clarification: by helping people find the original sources so that they can replicate the analysis themselves, by referencing other reputable studies that come to the same conclusions, by reminding others to remain vigilant about the limitations of the data, and by answering questions about the implications of a specific graph,” they further explain.

In other words, collective analysis that involves many brains is preferable to anti-maskers than simply accepting what one or two deep state “doctors” or “experts” on television claim to be true about the plandemic.

You can read more about the MIT study and its conclusions at this link.

More of the latest news about Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) skepticism can also be found at

Read More