A crucial part of "science" is peer review. If a "troll" disputes some key data sources or facts, should we banish and censor the troll, or should we respond with a well-cited set of hard facts? Why is Climate Science such a cesspool? Both sides are guilty of gross misrepresentation. My conclusion is that Climate Science is not "science" at all, but firmly rooted in politics.
People are allowed to have their own communities. If a persons comments, only to get a enrage and entice a negative response then they are a troll. They should be shown the door https://xkcd.com/1357/
3 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 24.2 ms ] thread