To me, your point reads very differently from their comment. A skeptic outlook informed by events and criticisms in the field, justified by a reference to those

To me, your point reads very differently from their comment. A skeptic outlook informed by events and criticisms in the field, justified by a reference to those events, is very different from dismissing a field out of hand. A charitable read of their comment interprets it as you do, but starting a criticism like this is not a good way to engage readers. I personally stopped reading reflexively and skipped to the replies to see if other people found anything worth engaging with, much like I do with clickbait titles.