4 ms·

I think this verdict is both good and bad. We've been dragging people through the mud over nothing now for a while and celebrating it. Society is sick. It needs

I think this verdict is both good and bad. We've been dragging people through the mud over nothing now for a while and celebrating it. Society is sick. It needs to stop. At the same time, I worry about a "chilling" effect on anyone who questions "the science". Whether you like them or not, we need people who question climate science. We need people who question vaccines. Yes, they are annoying and in this case they went way, way too far.

wolrah 3y ago
> At the same time, I worry about a "chilling" effect on anyone who questions "the science". In what way? This has nothing to do with disagreement, it's about defamation. Claiming that a researcher was intentionally and fraudulently manipulating data is an entirely different ballpark from disagreeing with their methods or conclusions. The various groups who have decided as a matter of dogma that their pet theory is correct therefore all of science must be a conspiracy to cover up the truth will of course present things as if this verdict threatens any dissent, but that's simply nonsense. > Whether you like them or not, we need people who question climate science. We need people who question vaccines. Yes, they are annoying and in this case they went way, way too far. We need people who question science *in good faith*. People who disagree because they have an alternative that also fits the known facts, or because they see valid weaknesses in the methods used to come to the conclusion. Scientific progress is built on questioning things. We do not need people like the defendants in this case who have decided that climate change is an evil liberal conspiracy to empower governments. We do not need people like Jenny McCarthy, RFK Jr., etc. who have decided that all the different often entirely unrelated kinds of vaccines in the world are somehow part of the same conspiracy to do...something. These people are not adding to the discussion, they're not contributing to progress, they're at best getting in the way and in a lot of cases trying their hardest to push things back. I could go on and on. Creationists, flat-earthers, moon landing deniers, etc. will all scream about how the scientific establishment is silencing them for questioning things, but the reality is they're just wrong, annoying, and deserve no credit for anything because they're not doing it in good faith. They're not trying to find the truth, they've decided they know the truth and are hostile to anything else.

wolrah 3y ago

> At the same time, I worry about a "chilling" effect on anyone who questions "the science". In what way? This has nothing to do with disagreement, it's about defamation. Claiming that a researcher was intentionally and fraudulently manipulating data is an entirely different ballpark from disagreeing with their methods or conclusions. The various groups who have decided as a matter of dogma that their pet theory is correct therefore all of science must be a conspiracy to cover up the truth will of course present things as if this verdict threatens any dissent, but that's simply nonsense. > Whether you like them or not, we need people who question climate science. We need people who question vaccines. Yes, they are annoying and in this case they went way, way too far. We need people who question science *in good faith*. People who disagree because they have an alternative that also fits the known facts, or because they see valid weaknesses in the methods used to come to the conclusion. Scientific progress is built on questioning things. We do not need people like the defendants in this case who have decided that climate change is an evil liberal conspiracy to empower governments. We do not need people like Jenny McCarthy, RFK Jr., etc. who have decided that all the different often entirely unrelated kinds of vaccines in the world are somehow part of the same conspiracy to do...something. These people are not adding to the discussion, they're not contributing to progress, they're at best getting in the way and in a lot of cases trying their hardest to push things back. I could go on and on. Creationists, flat-earthers, moon landing deniers, etc. will all scream about how the scientific establishment is silencing them for questioning things, but the reality is they're just wrong, annoying, and deserve no credit for anything because they're not doing it in good faith. They're not trying to find the truth, they've decided they know the truth and are hostile to anything else.