Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Bash's avatar

I was listening to Drs Ghandi, Makary, Attia, Damania on the Drive. Your name came up! They were having a sidebar on the Malone/Rogan podcast. One thought that came up was having a scientific debate structured in the form of legal discovery, where all materials are presented beforehand and all participants agree to limit the discussion to only those materials

I thought it was a great idea. It is a form of public peer review, or a scientific courtroom or something. Rarely do we get a chance for experts on differing sides of a problem have a long form discussion open to the public. Actually, more like never.

It would be a billion times better than constantly listening to the blathering "weathervanes" on cable news.

Expand full comment
Paul Surovell's avatar

I think you are too charitable to these pundits. I don't think they do any "averaging" I think they are spokespeople/stenographers for the official narrative, not "Weathervanes" who consider a range of views.

Expand full comment
15 more comments...

No posts