Hacker News Reader

Comment by div | Hacker News Reader

These people do not participate in science.

Next up: muting people who don't agree with the fact that inflation is good because the only people who deny it don't participate in economics.

But science isn't about someone agreeing with a theory. If you can disprove a theory, great. Otherwise no one really cares about your flawed arguments.

But science isn't about someone agreeing with a theory.

Those who advocate blocking dissent with theories in the name of science would disagree. Apparently, it's more important that people agree with a body of work that is largely impenetrable than it is to question it or disagree with it.

There is no time left to debate any more, we now have to act or we're all gonna die.

Suppressing dissent by a Soviet style thought police is a small price to pay if the future of the human species is at stake.

I for one, fully and sincerely and deeply believe in climate change, and I welcome our new bolsheviks in lab coats overlords.

But who is talking about blocking dissent? Not giving airtime on the BBC is blocking dissent, now? Should they also give airtime to the flat-earth society?

The BBC is not a scientific journal, it's a mass-media organization. It's not its job to promote every little scientific theory.

They should ban Songs of Praise as well then...

Edit: if you're going to down vote at least have the balls to explain your position.

I didn't downvote, but your comment is not pertinent.

The post to which I replied ironically stated that this is "a great victory for science", to which I responded that these people are not really participating in science (but rather playing politics).

Your comment on banning Songs of Praise seems to imply that I'd like all non-scientific TV to be curbed or banned, which is a straw man argument.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com