[dahart]

> Personally I do not have time/desire to crawl down this specific rabbit hole

It seems weird to say this when you've posted dozens of times on this topic with many, many links and quotes to the arguments that support your position. Are you not at all curious about whether the abstracts and conclusions are actually true?

[throw0101a]

Because I've collected a link here and a link there over the course of ~2 years: which basically is four time changes. There's always a smattering of news reports that link to various places each time that happens. From last fall:

* https://twitter.com/ChronobioCanada/status/13161222923180687...

So the end result may be 'large', but it's only a modest amount of effort that snowballs.

> Are you not at all curious about whether the abstracts and conclusions are actually true?

No more curious than going into the guts of an IPCC report to see if the abstracts and conclusions about climate change are true. In the post-Gutenberg world it's hard to be an expert in everything, so we have to trust others to get the details right in other fields: on this topic I'm willing to delegate.

[dahart]

It still seems weird. You’re repeating the conclusions forcefully and often as if they’re true. You’re taking more time to post than it would take to read the entire position paper in detail and check all the references. This is clearly a topic you care about, but you’re pretending and framing it as though it’s something you can’t be bothered to investigate, after investigating. You’ve mentioned IPCC twice in comments to me, but you’ve never posted quotes from IPCC abstracts or conclusions to Hacker News. Since you're actively participating in SRBR's advocacy, I’m confused about your story.