[eiieirurjdndjd]

It seems kind of like how incorrect news about science becomes “common knowledge”. This person probably saw someone else post this, and now they’re just parroting it back. That other person, they might have had it from a news article. Or maybe they were just parroting another comment in turn. Even if it was from the news, was that news sources from a sophisticated engineering perspective, or a bit of marketing fluff? Hard to know. Not saying whether this is correct or incorrect either, just making a comment about the sources of knowledge in general in the age of internet comments.

But it would be pretty quiet on here if people only talked about what they actually know.

[klodolph]

This is a classic ad hominem argument.

There was a claim made, someone asked for evidence, and then a third person provided the evidence. Done. This is a good way for discussions to work. What would really kill the discussion is if people stopped and gathered evidence first, and compiled it into every comment they made. I trust people are skeptical enough not to believe garbage, and if they’re curious they can ask questions or do additional research themselves.