I'm disappointed by Tyson's repeated defense of this statement. It's both ineffective and wrong. Ineffective: no one ever changed their mind because someone demanded blind faith. This just racks up likes from people who already like science. https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/1381197292728942595

Wrong: science is a human process for gaining understanding and, like all human processes, it is imperfect. Reviewers find (and sometimes miss!) mistakes. Papers are withdrawn or fail to replicate. A small number of fraudulent papers have made it to publication.

If someone doesn't believe something (e.g., vaccine safety), I find it much more effective to listen when they say why not. Once you understand, you can identify what safeguards were put in place (e.g., replication, public data sets) to prevent or mitigate error.

Sorta miffed that I'm less eloquent than @steak_umm on the topic https://twitter.com/NumbersMuncher/status/1381804144344903682?s=19