5 ms·

Using word 'denialist' in connection with scientific hypothesis seems somehow wrong.

• kennywinker 13y ago
  When the overwhelming body of evidence points to something, denialist seems appropriate. e.g. climate change denialist. There was a reasonable case for HIV is not the cause of AIDS for a while in the 90s, but everything that pointed that way was overturned by further inquiry. I met an HIV causes AIDS denialist once in university, so I did a bunch of research so find out if he was a crackpot or not. Things may have changed since I looked, but in 2007 there was no credible evidence I could find to suggest that HIV isn't the cause of AIDS.
  • newbie12 13y ago
    Describing someone as a "denialist" is a demonization, it is designed to connect the person to absurd Holocaust "deniers".
    • kennywinker 13y ago
      The point is definitely that it's demonizing. However, I don't think "denialist" is always referencing holocaust denial... that connection didn't occur to me until you mentioned it. I could only think of "climate change denialist" which may be a reference to holocaust denialism, but that's once removed already.