Hacker News Reader

We see this all the time when arguing with a side that doesn't care about the truth. Completely arbitrary, but I might say 10, and later find out 9. The other sides takes minor corrections/adjustments as fuel to say no, it must be 0 because the side saying 10 lied to you.

If everyone was really looking for the truth, this wouldn't be an issue because this is how science works. But, often one side is only pushing an agenda where the truth is irrelevant.

View on HN

What you said above could be applied to both sides of this debate, even in this thread. I hope that was your point, and not just an irony.

> What you said above could be applied to both sides of this debate, even in this thread. I

Not really.

One side says "there is no way to accurately tell exactly how many died in the Holocaust, but it's estimated the number can go as high as 6 million".

The other side says "the 6 million number is a lie they made up to push the idea the Holocaust happened".

Let's not pretend that attacking estimates by misrepresenting them like this is an argument made in good faith.

I'm one of those old fashioned people who thinks that encyclopedias should have facts in them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com