A claim that is correct is voted down because it has no warrant? A better way is to ask for a warrant rather then voting based off of your gut and assumptions a

A claim that is correct is voted down because it has no warrant? A better way is to ask for a warrant rather then voting based off of your gut and assumptions as people are doing now. People don't like being told they are wrong. Why don't read most of the threads here. Most claims are unwarranted. People vote based off there gut and whether they agree with it, it has nothing to do with substantiated evidence. Most people here don't know how bad the concept of null is so they voted based off of that, never knowing that the inventor of null dislikes the concept himself. Also keep in mind, Tony's claim itself has no evidence. He never lists why null is bad. His claim is unwarranted, but his reputation precedes him. You as others do vote based off of emotion and are unable to admit it.