Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
I'm seeing the key difference here being that the journalist in question is both accepted by common society and accredited as an actual practitioner of his professed profession, as opposed to the main character of the article who not only possesses no education or credentials to back up his claims but in general is not accepted by anyone else as a "scientist" either. Can we agree that there is a difference between, say, possessing a medical degree and being hired to work in a hospital, as opposed to running around with a meat cleaver and insisting everyone call you "Herr Doctor"?