And Cochrane's own analysis says there's no evidence of masks doing anything.
What do you mean "Cochrane's own analysis"? It's a review organisation - essentially a publisher - where the articles represent the individual work of its members.
Secondly, the Cochrane review you're talking about simply omitted a huge chunk of the available evidence base, and you're simply ignoring reams of discussion about what that result meant. And this is what I mean when you say mindlessly repeat back accusations thrown at you without understanding anything you're talking about. You claim we provide papers with poor methodology, but you don't understand pretty much anything about methodology to have a useful judgement on the matter.
I mean, as I will never let you forget, you had to have the meaning of a p-value explained to you. It's one of the most fundamental concepts in scientific statistics. And yet even despite that any many other howlers, here you are, still acting like you know anything. Is a complete lack of humility, or are you just too incompetent to realise how insufficient your knowledge is?