>>13822185"trust science" at the base level means trust the broad consensus, if it exists, of people who in an unbiased fashion studied a topic and have statistical evidence - as opposed to follow your guy feeling.
I think this is agreeable. Of course, whether a thing has been studied in enough detail, if there's a broad consensus and wether those people have no bias, this is a big if and not a scientific one.
So what remains is to refer to people who have a model and are "experts". Trust the science doesn't mean to trust the claims of experts and their model, if the other bullet points above are not fulfilled.
t. anti-vaxxer with a chemistry PhD
(having Corona is not a big deal and so the vaxx is a minor but largely redundant risk, especially if 70% of people have already taken it)
