In the context of the comment, anti-science was correctly used. There was nothing scientific about it.

> Is debate allowed about in science anymore?

Of the type we are discussing? It's never been allowed. It's always been discouraged. You can see similar types of debates when people talk about teaching the controversy.

In fact, science is not about debate. It's about presenting facts in support of an argument. Merely arguing is pointless.

"In fact, science is not about debate. It's about presenting facts in support of an argument. Merely arguing is pointless."

What science "is" is a subjective opinion, and there are many different claims what science really is. In my opinion debate is important to science. In addition, 'presenting facts in support of an argument' is debating in my opinion.

Pedantic comments like this are worthless. You know what I meant. And rather than discuss that meaning, you decided to take a trip on anal train.

Anyways, I'm not about to explain why allowing holocaust denialists equal time is a silly proposition.

Huff! Puff! That's antilogic because I disagree! /s

I've always seen debate as the fundamental principle of advancing science (and have no idea what Popper may think on the subject).