Did guns or vaccines save more lives in 2021?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The alternative is to state, ‘Due to the flawed methodology and absurd claims in Boru’s ‘On The Meaning Of Facial Expressions In South American Rodentia’ , we conclude that the meaning of such facial expressions remains unknown. Funding is unavailable for a counter-study at this time.’ The response would be similar in the case of Kleck’s study - we simply don’t know how many lives are saved by gun use.

And THAT, me old mucker, is how science works. Science is not required to accept a dubious claim simply because no one has taken the time and trouble to formally refute it.

Boru

So, do you think that The Mad Revisionists are basically right, but that, instead of concluding "The Moon does not exist.", they should say "We do not know whether the Moon exists."?

Of course I don't, but that's not remotely the same thing. No one seriously questions whether the Moon exists or that firearms do, in fact, save lives.

In the case of the gun study, a dubious conclusion was reached using questionable methodology. Kleck wasn't trying to establish whether guns save lives, but how many lives are saved by gun use. In other words, he was attempting to quantify a known phenomenon.

Similarly, we know the Moon exists. We can see it, people have been there, we have bits of it here on Earth, we can observe the tidal effects of it, etc. The Revisionist aren't doing what Kleck did - they're trying to deny an observed fact. That's way, way, different.

Boru