Yes, because it’s a political topic that's, pragmatically speaking, only science adjacent. To be clear I'm talking about discussions on the topic, not the merits of the work posted.

If I say “general relativity is likely wrong, but we should use the verifiable predictions it makes” no one will care. If I say “climate models are likely wrong, but we should use the verifiable predictions they make” the hackles will rise despite there being no known climate model with predictive power anywhere close to GR.

Obviously this makes the discussions far less rewarding to one’s intellectual curiosity. Like a fool I still check occasionally on the off chance that there is something interesting to be learned.

Well, the root comment here is boldly assertive but completely wrong on the facts. What sort of reply should it receive?