Did "the science" you looked into indicate definitively whether the virus originated naturally from a bat sold in a "wet market" right next to the Wuhan lab (*wink* *wink*), or was it created through "gain of function" in the laboratory itself which, *wink* *wink*, was "studying" the exact same virus?

If "the science" can't (or pretends it can't) answer that question, then does it really understand the existential nature of the virus?

Did "the science" you look into nail down the long-term risks of the various vaccines, or is this a get-jabbed-now-and-hope-for-the-best proposition?

In any case, I don't appreciate the propaganda technique you employ in this article, in which you oversimplify (and thus distort) reality by branding all of the vaccine-hesitant as extremists acting purely in service of libertarian ideology. Many who are hesitant to vaccines follow the rules around mask-wearing and social distancing (myself included), and are avoiding the vaccine (so far) for reasons that have nothing to do with any political doctrine.