Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by skywhopper 7 days ago
It makes her arguments highly suspect, yes.
2 comments

You can also argue the opposite, that due to her working with a particular interest in proving the organic industry wrong, she is finding factual information about it. As usual, information should be dismissed or confirmed with more information, not with fallacies
OTOH this stuff has already been refuted and pesticide makers lobbying like this, spreading FUD on organic food, is a well known pattern already.

We can't afford properly refuting each occurrence, the effort is highly asymmetrical.

Refuted where? Be specific.
The principle of charity suggests we should assume good intentions about others and their ideas, and give them the benefit of the doubt before criticising them.

https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-the-principle-of-char...

Seems like a great way to get conned. I'll pass.