|
|
|
|
|
by larsonf
4639 days ago
|
|
I think you're right on this. It's not so much about whether the stance is true or not and whether we should debate that. It's that articles that discredit something as trivially untrue by way of a trivially small statement. In the extreme it would be like discrediting [insert pseudoscience topic] by simply mentioning a copy of Nature. There's some degree here, sure. But tabloid-style takedowns, regardless of whether they are right, seem almost out of place. I am wrong to say this has no place, though, which is in itself a pretty big claim with no substance behind it. |
|