Posted October 06, 2016
low rated
![avatar](http://images.gog.com/39f88b7915e872d5123f9d16e3393f4eb99c6ed2cd2fcd7accf0254ea095000c_avm.jpg)
Fine, make and test some hypotheses, but if you form conclusions that lack a factual basis, you have deviated from scientific methodology, and are doing the very same thing you are accusing others of.
![avatar](http://images.gog.com/695e6dd1ae067297d5da46d3ef9e53279f4fed1957a3939d224a0d8e8a0beca3_avm.jpg)
You seem to think that the scientific way is to leave it at that, and simply say "we cannot answer", but it is not. Scientists work with the best knowledge at hand, the one that is most likely and requires the fewest assumptions to be true, often that knowledge is merely theoretical, but we must still work with it until that theory is outright proven or a better alternative presents itself. Scientists then proceed to try and disprove that theory, like I expect people to try to prove malice when making an accusation of conspiracy, in the absence of that proof the most probable answer stands. It may stand for a long time, such as gravitational waves, predicted by Einstein but only proven a century later.
To ignore that is the argument behind teaching Creationism in school right alongside Evolutionism, to say that because they are both merely theories therefore they're equally likely.
Besides, inaction is an action onto itself. When someone claims that we can't conclude whether or not vaccines cause autism (which to my knowledge it has been proven they do not), and decides not to vaccinate their child a choice has been made just the same as if they had categorically afirmed that they do. Times like those you can't wash your hands of the situation.