Does Bill Maher not appeal to scientific authority when he trashes religion? Yes, that's how he makes his case against religious beliefs (see Religulous). But it's not okay to appeal to scientific authority when dealing with a matter of science such as whether or not vaccines are safe and effective and should be used by the general population? Why not? Why not take what the majority of the scientific community has concluded about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines seriously? That is the logical approach. I heard Bill's case against vaccination, and it was based on disjointed cherrypicking of scientists and advocacy groups who hold the minority view of vaccinations while ignoring the overwhelming scientific majority view of vaccinations.
The "appeal to authority" argument is usually made be skeptics when attacking people making out of the mainstream claims. For example: a certain respected scientist believes in ghosts, therefore the reality of ghosts is more credible. I am not appealing to authority when I am supporting the overwhelming scientific majority regarding vaccines.
I certainly support Bill Maher's right to opinion, expression, and free speech. I actually like him a lot, watch his show regularly, and subscribe to HBO partly to catch his show, so I am not a Bill Maher basher of any sort. But he sounds like ignorant idiot when he rants about vaccines using cherrypicked Internet searches of vaccine opponents to make his case against vaccines on TV. Based on his statements, he is clearly not considering the entire body of scientific evidence regarding vaccines and is rather choosing to only acknowledge a minority scientific point of view that is anti-vaccine to form his opinion. Like what people of religious faith do to validate their religious worldview. Bill should know better.
I defer to the experts regarding vaccines because they have the educational training, have done the research under the rigors of science, published peer review papers on the topic, and the results of vaccinations speak for themselves. Essentially, I believe in the scientific process and the results it provides. We had a President in the 1930s and early 1940s who was crippled by polio, and now the disease does not exist in the United States. We can thank vaccines for this improvement whether Bill Maher believes they are safe and effective or not.
I have not given up my free will to question vaccines just because I believe in science. I support removing thermisol (mercury) from vaccines despite some scientists saying it is unnecessary to do so. I think everyone should have the free will and free speech to question vaccinations and chose not to be vaccinated. But people like Bill Maher need to be challenged when they make such obviously flawed arguments as he's made about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. |
