Although Popular Science initially blames the problem of “trolls and spambots” as the reason for no longer accepting comments on its articles, if you continue reading their explanatory post, you’ll find the real reason is that people are questioning the “official” science.
A fractious minority wields enough power to skew a reader’s perception of a story, recent research suggests…
Another, similarly designed study found that just firmly worded (but not uncivil) disagreements between commenters impacted readers’ perception of science.
Oops, that’s a completely different reason. Anyway, some would see such “disagreements” as people offering another point of view. That’s not how Popular Science sees it:
A politically motivated, decades-long war on expertise has eroded the popular consensus on a wide variety of scientifically validated topics. Everything, from evolution to the origins of climate change, is mistakenly up for grabs again. Scientific certainty is just another thing for two people to “debate” on television. And because comments sections tend to be a grotesque reflection of the media culture surrounding them, the cynical work of undermining bedrock scientific doctrine is now being done beneath our own stories, within a website devoted to championing science.
Scientific certainty? What arrogance. I thought the bedrock of scientific doctrine was keeping an open mind and continually testing theories.
As for disagreement being politically motivated, look at the two things they mention as being scientifically validated topics: evolution and the origins of climate change. Talk about taking things by faith (or embracing falsified data). Did they forget about the leaked emails in which scientists admitted to manipulating climate data? Have they finally found the missing link? The political agenda behind climate change is global control and the political agenda behind evolution is the erosion of Biblical authority.
In addition, am I the only one who finds it highly offensive that Popular Science considers the work of those who comment on articles “a grotesque reflection of the media culture surrounding them”?
Since it’s not the commentators who are parroting the official stories, the Popular Science post should instead read, “The articles of Popular Science are a grotesque reflection of the narratives endorsed by the global elite.”
Nevertheless, the article actually reveals the real reason for shutting down comments:
–commenters shape public opinion; public opinion shapes public policy; public policy shapes how and whether and what research gets funded–you start to see why we feel compelled to hit the “off” switch.
What a surprise. It’s about money. Isn’t it always? As the Scriptures state, the love of money is the root of all evil. In this case, we have a formerly respectable magazine spewing the propaganda of the global elitists, who don’t want anyone questioning the “official” stories, which in some cases they call “science”.