So you'd be more convinced there was something to flat-earth arguments if they were banned? Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence that you can access? Some of which you can verify for yourself. I don't see any good reason why such views would change your bayesian priors just because something was banned. Something which I'm sure you could find elsewhere if you really were curious.
My assumption would be such views were banned (at least on certiain widely viewed platforms or in schools) because a sizable section of society thought they were not only obviously false but also promoted harmful views, like neo-nazism in the case of Holocaust denial.
Those views are so badly wrong that they're anti-science and anti-history. There's no reason to give them credence.
My assumption would be such views were banned (at least on certiain widely viewed platforms or in schools) because a sizable section of society thought they were not only obviously false but also promoted harmful views, like neo-nazism in the case of Holocaust denial.
Those views are so badly wrong that they're anti-science and anti-history. There's no reason to give them credence.