>No we don't, and questioning settled science is usually a racist dog whistle.

Yeah, just like McClintock was known for her wildly racist views. Along with Watson and Crick - that whole "DNA is important" was just a ruse to get the redliners out. And who could forget Einstein? Only tools know the Theory of Relatively has anything to do with physics.

And anyone who uses the term "settled science" doesn't understand what science is

> No we don't, and questioning settled science is usually a racist dog whistle.

Woah, a claim this bold is gonna need some more explanation bub. Science is quite literally never settled. Even gravity gets new developments every once and while.

"He's racist!"

It's sad that this term has lost so much meaning these days, thanks to people like you who just throw it around at anyone you disagree with.

Whenever I hear someone say that now, my immediate reaction is to think "this is a low-IQ nutjob" and I stop listening.

greatly enjoying your humor

> Here's the problem is that people who oppose The Science have fundamentally shown themselves incapable of listening to reason or being educated they have willfully chosen ignorance

And the solution to that is to silence them, yet that is not considered a form of incapable listening and wilfully chosen ignorance by those who are so wise as to know the difference between good and bad information?

“If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”

J. S. Mill, On Liberty