• walnutwalrus@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wouldn’t call it pseudoscience, and your link could be “debunked” by people with opposing views; it would be more helpful to discuss the issue at hand rather than respond as such

      • walnutwalrus@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        “everything that is wrong is pseudoscience”

        how about a hypothesis? doctors prescribed cancer-causing cigarettes at one time, right? There are people raising concerns over the dangers of microwaves, that is all. We can have a discussion about it, or I can just call the view that “microwaves are safe” “pseudoscience”… but then there isn’t really much of a discussion.

    • Maple Engineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s the problem. You believe the nonsense. You can’t provide credible sources because the nonsense is not credible it is unworthy of discussion. There is no middle ground. It is garbage.