Hacker News Reader

So we're to believe the government without any evidence? That's the classic case of argument from authority.

Just because "argument from authority" was put on some internet list of biases doesn't mean it can not, at times, serve as a useful heuristic.

There's also a difference between "argument from authority" and "argument from a position of known knowledge". Example: radio ad says "Buy milk! We need milk". Will you give it the same credence as your spouse saying the same thing?

"the government" is made up of a shit ton of people. I don't think there's some grand conspiracy involving the intelligence agencies, the Obama administration, and even Republican Senators to make all this up.

You're right. There must be WMD in Iraq.

You're being intellectually dishonest. You have no way of knowing about correct reports that the intelligence community provides the military on a constant basis.

It's "intellectually dishonest" to doubt the existence and alleged content of material we'll never see? That's Orwellian.

Intellectually dishonest? You're the one who started this comment chain with the false dichotomy that anyone asking for concrete evidence is either a Russian shill or Trump supporter.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com