Occam's razor

Which is the simpler explanation?

That the world has produced a new super disease which threatens to kill many of us and we need to shut-down life as we know it and suspend our constitutional rights in order to save ourselves from it?
-or-
That people lie to achieve their political goals?

Never waste a good crisis; especially an invisible "possible" crisis that can create enough fear for folks to accept whatever change the powers that be want to make.  Keep in mind, it's only Pence and the irresponsible propaganda machine (mass media) telling us we are going to kill the disease or stop it.  Our other "leaders" are more honestly conveying these unreasonable efforts are only meant to slow the spread.

Who are you going to believe?

People on the government payroll who have nothing to lose by the stories they are telling to keep you afraid?
-or-
The people who work in these fields that are risking their careers to speak out against what the government is doing?

Why would anyone be more willing to believe politicians and bureaucrats over those actually working in the fields?

Fear

There is nothing to fear in the disease!  Take precautions?  Sure.  Isolate those most vulnerable to any disease right now?  Yes.  Lock down the country because of fear-mongering? No.

There is everything to fear in giving the government more power.  Give up our essential liberties in order to achieve a better tomorrow?  Can you not hear the paradox?

Force

Remember what you learned in Kindergarten?  Hitting and killing are bad.  Force is supposed to be the last resort for defense and should never be used to push an agenda nor an idea, no matter how correct people may think it is.

Science

Before I go for today I want to list the scientific method.  Please note that nowhere in the method are the terms "extrapolate" or "statistics".  Science is black and white; either it can be proven and it is fact or it can be substantiated (but not proven) and it becomes theory.  At no point is a hypothesis considered fact nor theory.

1. Make an observation.
2. Ask a question.
3. Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.
4. Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
5. Test the prediction.
6. Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.

Definition "Iterate" - perform repeatedly.

There is no science in prediction, but predictions can be tested to get science.

This is a good reference to understand that even in science you have to accept "factual" results as possibly being true because further testing might prove a fact to have been lacking or even false tomorrow.

Science uses specialized terms that have different meanings than everyday usage. These definitions correspond to the way scientists typically use these terms in the context of their work. Note, especially, that the meaning of “theory” in science is different than the meaning of “theory” in everyday conversation.

• Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.
• Hypothesis: A tentative statement about the natural world leading to deductions that can be tested. If the deductions are verified, the hypothesis is provisionally corroborated. If the deductions are incorrect, the original hypothesis is proved false and must be abandoned or modified. Hypotheses can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations.
• Law: A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances.
• Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

Sources:
The scientific method, Khan Academy
Definitions of Fact, Theory, and Law in Scientific Work, National Center for Science Education.
The Role of Theory in Advancing 21st Century Biology, National Academy of Sciences