Yes you have so much more eloquently found the word: normalize. That's exactly what this is. It's like pushing the window. It's asking something like "have y

Yes you have so much more eloquently found the word: normalize. That's exactly what this is. It's like pushing the window. It's asking something like "have you read the climate science that says we're NOT responsible for global warming?" or "have you listened to that doctor who drives a car paid for by a cigarette company on the dangers of smoking? it's unproven!" or "the theory of evolution is just a theory". It's things like this that different groups of people react to different ways. I used to roll my eyes. Some people are like, hm, that seems valid. The words sound big. Others are in the absolute crackpot camp, the alien probes and cattle mutilations. Now that the crackpots are more well armed than the normal intelligent people, I'm a bit scared. They also seem to be more effective at sabotaging the government using the same tactics. And if you ask "why was this article written" or "what purpose does this article serve" or "why is it being promoted by this particular news site" - their answer will be "just to talk about it" or "presenting the other side". When really if you assume the author doesn't have evil intentions just makes them really hard to believe through their blind ignorance of the madness around them. IE, why would anyone read this drivel, it offers nothing. If they do have evil intent, then I go back to my previous contention as to the nature of it being a dogwhistle.