| I see what you're saying, but consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide > [DHMO]: > - is also known as hydroxyl acid, and is the major component of acid rain. > - contributes to the "greenhouse effect". > - contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape. > - has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients. [etc.] > Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used: as an industrial solvent and coolant [...] [and] as an additive in certain "junk-foods" and other food products. You can convince virtually anyone that water is dangerous and should be outlawed by saying only true things. > In 2001, a staffer in New Zealand Green Party [...] office responded to a request for support for a campaign to ban dihydrogen monoxide by saying she was "absolutely supportive of the campaign to ban this toxic substance". This was criticized in a press release by the National Party, one of whose MPs fell for the very same joke six years later. More related to this thread, the difference between "just asking questions" and "just sowing doubt" is in the effect on the casual reader rather than in the legitimacy of the question, unfortunately :(. There are things that are harmful to randomly call into question without being specific enough (such that it may sound like you're doubting all of climate change) and/or doing your own research first (many things needn't be carefully asked if you just type it into duckduckgo instead), I believe. Not saying anyone was sowing doubt here, I'm just responding to your point that there cannot be questions that are off-limits in science. (Also noting that this is a comment thread for the general public on the topic of some graphs, not precisely scientific discourse itself.) |