(reason.com)

473 points Bostonian | 2 comments | 18 Nov 24 22:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.508s | source

Show context

alistairSH ◴[19 Nov 24 14:33 UTC] No.42183843[source]▶

Does the author not understand the concept of "opinion piece"? Every "article" he takes issue with is NOT a scientific article, but an opinion piece.

replies(10): >>42183882 #>>42183968 #>>42184036 #>>42184071 #>>42184124 #>>42184194 #>>42184196 #>>42184198 #>>42184592 #>>42184655 #

1. trosi ◴[19 Nov 24 14:52 UTC] No.42184036[source]▶

>>42183843 #

If you include enough opinion pieces on highly controversial subjects and always from the same perspective your readers will start noticing. Just because they are opinions it doesn't mean that people can't deem them ridiculous.

replies(1): >>42184582 #

2. alistairSH ◴[19 Nov 24 15:33 UTC] No.42184582[source]▶

>>42184036 (TP) #

Sure, but the author gave us two examples over how many issues? He didn't come remotely close to making his point. :shrug:

↑

Scientific American's departing editor and the politicization of science