it's not complicated: people don't like heresy. notice how there are zero comments on this page that deal with the substance of the article in question, instead choosing to find various surface-level reasons unrelated to the findings in the article as cause to internally dismiss it.
if the content of the article was not heresy and instead came from some trusted scientific authority, this would not be the case.
It doesn't even rise to the level of being wrong. Nobody is even remotely interested in engaging what you call the "substance" of the article, because https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law
The people who are working on COVID are too fucking busy to waste their time arguing with kooks who claim they are rational.
Tip: if you go to https://news.ycombinator.com/active instead of the front page you can see stories that were flagged. This is how I read HN because the number of interesting, relevant and useful stories that get flagged for ideological reasons is just far too high. This one being a good case in point. It's a pattern: there's a group of people who will reliably flag any article demonstrating that official COVID science is wrong. Doesn't matter what it's about - if it contradicts official narratives then it's probably going to disappear within an hour or two.
One might think a site dedicated to intellectual curiousity would be interested in stories like that, or that at least flagging such stories would be penalized, but no.
Thanks. That's a good idea. I already have showdead activated, so I can at least track them down when they disappear.
Wonder if this phenomenon is discussed with dang et al. I am very motivated to find the truth whereever the search takes me, so encountering this kind of collectivist censorship is very frustrating.
if the content of the article was not heresy and instead came from some trusted scientific authority, this would not be the case.