zlacker

You can’t stay on a high horse like that if your opinion is that some other opinion is a dumb, ridiculous conspiracy theory and then you change your opinion to that theory.

If you want a fair discussion of theories you can’t label the other one a conspiracy theory.

>>tinus_+(OP)
I agree that using the phrase 'conspiracy theory' in the original Lancet letter was too much. And I'm totally fine with people taking issue with that. And, in hindsight, they really should've waited for more information before forming and strongly expressing such an opinion. They're definitely not free from blame. But I still think people should be able to change their mind by any amount based on new information. Why would you possibly argue that people should have to stick with ideas they no longer believe in just because they previously argued against them?

So, should they be able to change their mind? Sure. Should they be less dismissive of opposing views? Also yes. There's no contradiction there.

>>someth+C2
Of course they can change their opinion. But if you express your opinion by questioning the credibility of others and then change your mind then what should that do to your credibility?