comment: >
  
  
  The biggest issue is that it is very easy(well, relatively easy) to take a real study and then use out of context quotes, or re-tell the results in a misleading way, or just outright lie about what the study says to further your misinformation agenda.
  
  I honestly feel like most of the misinformation out there doesn't even refer to research. It's just a bunch of weird claims that make references to "common sense",  as if that explains everything.
  As an example, there's that claim circulating that masks don't work because "if I fart I can still smell it through my pants". 
  How the fuck do you counter that in a way that reaches the people who buy into this crap? (Pun reluctantly intended.)
context: People need to stop acting like their emotions and personal beliefs matter at all when it comes to science. Your feelings don't matter, your opinion don't matter, only thing that matters when it comes to science is scientific evidence. >
  
  That's not the only problem.
  The biggest issue is that it is very easy(well, relatively easy) to take a real study and then use out of context quotes, or re-tell the results in a misleading way, or just outright lie about what the study says to further your misinformation agenda.
  The rebuttal to these can take hours of work to figure out depending on the specifics, and are way too labour intensive for the average person to even begin to do, and often require high level knowledge to even understand. It's an endless game of whack-a-mole, and has really exploded with the ever expanding echo chambers online. 
  Social media has really removed most kinds of nuance in favor of ingroup buzzwords and catchy or emotion inducing titles.