No part of your comment addresses any "nonsense" or "danger" in the Nature article ( https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00240-9 )

The context was:

  > *At least read the Nature one, damn.* ~ @thrance
  > *I read the article. It's dangerous nonsense.* ~ @ConspiracyFact 
  > *Where's the danger? Where's the nonsense in acknowledging the origins of algebra?* ~ @myself
Do you have _ any _ meaningful critique of the contents of, say, maths historian George Joseph’s book The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (1991) ?

This appears to be old established material that I read in the ANU library back in the early 1980s.

I read the Nature article, and I read the seminal work on the subject Orientalism by Said. The context of the article is post-colonialism, a very established philosophical movement. This is shown when they mention whether mathematics is socially constructed and in the actual title "decolonization". I then proceeded to criticize that movement and explain why it is a problem for mathematics.

You and the other poster responded with anger, I do not agree I am the one who is not meaningfully contributing

Do you think there may have been developments in this space since 1978, when Said published Orientalism?

I don't mean to be rude, but do you think it's possible that your understanding of the situation is a bit out of date?

Maybe, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the subject.

Which part of my critique of post-colonialism do you think had become obsolete?

>Therefore it is common for an adherent of post-colonialism to believe a statement is true if it was made by a person arbitrarily considered oppressed

This part. I'm not sure if it's because it's out of date or just plain wrong, though.

I could give your own post as an example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43685383 , where you judged a statement as false due to the presumed location of the author in the power/knowledge spectrum.

But sorry, it's hard to discuss when you quote a single sentence from the few paragraphs i've written and say it's wrong, with nothing added. When adding to it your replies in previous discussions we had such as this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43705166

I feel you are overly emotionally attached to the subject and this is approaching troll/flame territory. It's not that I don't want to discuss with you, but I feel in our engagements a lot of aggression and very little actual passing of information except for short sentences, so let's end it right here

That isn't a response to what I was asking.

You just sent links to me without acknowledging the conversation we were having at all.

Very, very strange.