3 ms·

The cost of a free thought is that some people will believe in some weird stuff. I think this is much preferable to the alternative of a controlled ecosystem o

• Nursie 5y ago
  The point is that a respected mainstream newspaper is spreading crap in a fairly uncritical way. The alternative isn't "Ban this sick filth!" but to apply pressure to the Times and other outlets which frame pseudoscientific crap as being on a level with actual knowledge.
• kangnkodos 5y ago
  It's true that people are people, and everyone has a weird thought now and then. It's natural. That's just how people are. Everyone all over the place has ideas like this. The New York Times goes on and on about 12 people on Facebook repeating weird ideas about vaccines being dangerous. They are Republicans so that must be condemned. Because it's not scientific. On the other hand, water witching is new age. So they're Democrats. So it's OK for the New York Times to give a wink and a nod to the idea that these Democrats just might know more than scientists. It inconceivable how a Republican would believe an unscientific idea about vaccines being bad. It's natural to see how a Democrat would believe an unscientific idea about water witching being good.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]