Perhaps because the community felt it did not produce an intellectually interesting discussion and that the odds of it producing one were significantly lower than the odds of it producing an unproductive one.

+ As a news item: While the topic may be intellectually interesting, the Hacker News community probably doesn't bring much specific informed expertise to the topic and no person's experience is going to stand out as more relevant to the point that anyone changes their opinions...Peter Norvig's opinion is no more informed than Marrissa Meyer's.

+ As a topic inspiring discussion: much of the discussion wound up being meta-discussion about Hacker News, e.g. this thread. As this comment demonstrates, that is a topic that leads to rather dull discussions.

Because enough people didn't like it/are threatened by evidence going against the narrative.