Lycanthropos

It is crazy that you have to clarify that you're vaccinated and that you think it safe so that you won't be labelled as a conspiracy theorist for saying what is essentially a logical fact

>You imply that there is such thing as absolute fact or absolute truth. Which is not the case unfortunately

Is this not an absolute fact or an absolute truth? You're making an absolute universal claim even though you just rejected the notion of a absolute universal fact.

"Scientific fact" is a political buzzword and inherently contradictory. The scientific worldview doesn't allow for so-called scientific facts to be a thing. Sure, there is expert consensus or whatever, but that's precisely what it is: expert consensus, not fact.

Experts have been wrong in the past, and there's nothing that guarantees they're not wrong now. In fact, if we take historical science into account, the chances that our experts are correct are very very slim.

There are logical/mathematical/philosophical facts, but not scientific facts. Science is about experimentation and observation, which are inherently flawed and imperfect.

Whenever I see RT mentioned, it's always called a "sophisticated propaganda operation" (or something along those lines), and I must say I can't help but physically cringe.

Almost as if every other news network and media company is not a propaganda operation meant to serve interests, and RT is the odd one out.

I always find it interesting how when western countries have state-owned media (like BBC) they're considered normal media networks, but when Russia, or another non-NATO western-aligned country has state-owned media it's "a propaganda operation".

Wikipedia is more dangerous, because it appears as legitimate and credble when it is not. For the most part it is a more formal front-end for all newspapers and journaling sites, further promoting the already-prevalent western cultural biases and mouthpieces. Most of the edits are made the same people (organizations?), that are in the double digits.

I never trust anything I read on wikipedia, not even for so-called objective issues and common facts, because there are always interests hiding behind even the least controversial topics. Just read the sources it provides, and even then it's flawed because they pick and choose the ones that fit their narrative best.