Free Soviets wrote:
none of those actually point to any sort of scientific consensus at all. the closest you've got is the early observation of something happening that was concentrated among homosexuals. but nobody thought it was a homosexual virus. mainly because the idea of such a thing is fucking stupid.
Maybe we should define consensus, FS. B/c when I read that scientists specializing in the field of research that AIDS was administered under considered it a gay virus, I think that there was, at that time, a consensus among those knowledgeable of the instance. I realize that it was a working theory, but so is GCC. My point is that consensus is a poor defense of GCC. If the data alone is compelling enough, let that stand and disregard the skeptics. But to argue for marginalization of non-experts for being skeptical on the basis of consensus? You introduce a form of autgoritarianism to the discussion that requires those that play with you to be brow beaten with your majority opinion and be lauhed at for it.
And here I was thinking you favored equality or some other shit.