Read on Twitter
Going to go out on a very small limb and assert that these claims by the government that they were "following the science" are 100% cowardice-motivated arse covering with a hefty helping of despicable blame shifting on the side
/1 https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1253392053326807041">https://twitter.com/guardian/...
/1 https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1253392053326807041">https://twitter.com/guardian/...
Saying they& #39;re "following the science" suggests that there was only ever one & #39;the science& #39; and that our poor innocent leaders trusted it and were & #39;let down& #39; because the science turned out to be wrong
A handy narrative, which only works if you ignore reality itself
/2
A handy narrative, which only works if you ignore reality itself
/2
Fact is, science is constantly diverse, messy and uncertain, because so many things outside the absolute fundamentals aren& #39;t perfectly understood. And even the supposed fundamentals are still subject of some debate
/3
/3
When we& #39;re talking about something new and unpredictable, like, let& #39;s say a novel virus, science won& #39;t have nearly enough data to form a robust consensus. There will be many theories, predictions and models, all of which are different, all of which are perfectly good science
/4
/4
And then trying to figure out how this unfamiliar pathogen will affect something as wildly chaotic and complicated as a modern human population, that& #39;s just going to throw up all manner of possibilities. All of which are scientifically valid
/5
/5
So for the government to say they followed "the science" when deciding their #covid19 strategy (such as it was) is meaningless. There were dozens of "the science"s to choose from.
/6
/6
I& #39;d wager what the government did was prioritise "the science" that supported what they already wanted to do. Why were modellers prioritised over clinical experts/experienced medics? Because the former told them more of what they wanted to hear. Basic confirmation bias
/7
/7
"Following the science" is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. Choosing which science to follow in a situation like this is one of the more important ones. The fact our government chose "science" that contradicted that of so many other countries is not just random chance
/8
/8
Boris Johnson didn& #39;t boast about still shaking hands or crow about "taking it on the chin" because & #39;the science& #39; told him to
He was already going to do that, because that& #39;s his whole ludicrous schtick. He focused on & #39;the science& #39; that best & #39;justified& #39; it
/9
He was already going to do that, because that& #39;s his whole ludicrous schtick. He focused on & #39;the science& #39; that best & #39;justified& #39; it
/9
Except viruses have no concept of British exceptionalism or populist rabble-rousing. And they wouldn& #39;t give a damn about them if they did. As we& #39;re now seeing as the heartbreaking cost mounts every day and our whole society is shut down
/10
/10
The government saying they "followed the science" so can& #39;t be blamed for the #Covid19 fallout from their actions is like a drunk driver at a crash site insisting they can& #39;t be held responsible because they were "obeying the law" as they had their seatbelt on
/11
/11
And yes, I *am* angry about this. Unbelievably so. My dad caught #Covid19 during Johnson& #39;s & #39;nothing to worry about& #39; herd-immunity period when other countries were locking down. He was 58 and in good heath.
He died on Monday.
/12
He died on Monday.
/12
As far as I& #39;m concerned, based on all the available evidence, and whether due to cowardice, negligence, incompetence or sociopathic indifference, Boris Johnson and his government are responsible for my father& #39;s death
They need to answer for that
/13
They need to answer for that
/13
So the thought of Jonson and co BLAMING science and scientists, like myself, for their own catastrophic failings? No, absolutely not. That& #39;s something I can only ever fight tooth and nail, and always will
/end
/end
