3 ms·
lozenge stated: "So what's your source that the YouTuber has accurately parroted scientific findings?" To which you replied: "Vincent Racaniello is a professor
by netizen-936824 5y ago
lozenge stated: "So what's your source that the YouTuber has accurately parroted scientific findings?"
To which you replied: "Vincent Racaniello is a professor of virology.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Racaniello https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Racaniello"
This is an appeal to the authority of Vincent's position as a professor
- cinntaile 5y agoOn its own you can interpret it like that, but this is a bit unfair. I have already explained what I meant with my comment, I even have a comment that predates the one you cite where I explicitly claim that he can be wrong... My point was not to say that he's right because he's a professor. It was to clarify that he's not a random YouTuber.
- netizen-936824 5y agoIt seems silly, to me at least, to take external statements to this given thread and apply them as if they were said here. I took your comment at face value, all seven words and the URL. That was the entire statement, there was no mention of "he's an expert but he could be wrong" When asked for evidence, the ONLY evidence that you provided, was that he IS an expert. Full stop.
- cinntaile 5y agoAt the time the message tree was vastly different. The messages were next to each other. It looked like this: GP /\ Comment. My 2nd reply with link. / My first reply where I said he could be wrong.