Dave makes a similar argument:
…
To limit the chance of moderation being triggered by that, you’d need to write out the “C3”.
I will say that is an opinion. To hold any opinion, you would have needed to have gathered some evidence to support that opinion for it to have any meaning. It is completely reasonable to then ask for that evidence to make up one’s own mind about that opinion and about the strength of the evidence.
I don’t care about your opinion or conjecture or answer, show me the work. Or in the language of /r/askhistorians: “good answers aren’t good just because they are right – they are good because they explain.”
Now when you keep posting the same opinion time and again, you’re soapboxing.
When you only care about, and only actively search for yourself, evidence supporting your opinion, you are no longer doing science but have turned into a dogmatist.
It’s a shitty game, those conjectures. Do your own homework exploring all sides of the issue not just the ones favoring your opinion, then share your research here so we can have a basis for discussion.
They are an attempt at a shortcut. Or rather wanting to be able to state an opinion without doing the work to support it is an attempt at a shortcut. You’ll be stuck inside the labyrinth, or on the ground, or at the foot of the mountain, forever if you try doing science like that because you tried to divine the solution before understanding the problem.
Your conjectures are broad and have bias. I’d move away from conjectures and just go with open research questions or narrow hypotheses on this forum. Leave the conjectures for your amply referenced popular science articles.