I encourage you to try to read it with an open mind. I didn't realize who the author was when I read it and I found it a somewhat reasonable summary of some rea

I encourage you to try to read it with an open mind. I didn't realize who the author was when I read it and I found it a somewhat reasonable summary of some real problems. Some parts are a bit hyperbolic (scepticism was shot), and the title is a bit misleading (most problems pertain to the interaction of science and public discourse, not intrinsic to science itself). Overall the article is nowhere as bad as his initial IFR estimates or fox news appearances, and I believe it is a good thing to keep communication open with people on the fringe, and this may be a worthwhile opportunity.