In case you missed it, these are people who knew Epstein was an unrepentant child molester. Epstein was proven guilty in court, made no statements of remorse, and these scientists continued to validate and support his behavior for years after, up until his death. If he had accepted responsibility for his crimes, I would feel differently about people who decide to associate with him while he spent the rest of his life in prison. But I doubt these scientists would have. The reason they liked Jeffrey was because he got away with everything. They admired his ability to rape on an industrial scale without consequences.

Nobody should ever be guilty by association. However, nobody is entitled to be a respected dino scientist. That is something you earn, and I see no reason not to include their feelings about child rape when discussing whether most attendees would feel comfortable with them at a conference.

Nah. The guilt by association fallacy is more like:

• [P1] Hitler ate bread.
• [P2] Hitler was a bad person.
• [C] Thus if you eat bread, you're as bad as Hitler.

That is not even remotely close to what the DinoCon is doing. If we interpret their actions as an argument, it's more like:

• [P1] Knowingly associating yourself with a bad person makes you a bad person.
• [P2] Those people knowingly associating themselves with Epstein, a bad person.
• [C] Thus those people are bad people.

You might disagree with the first premise (it's a moral premise, so it depends on your values), but the argument is perfectly logical.

Socializing with known child molesters is beyond the pale. If the government isn't going to deal with them properly one of the better options for the rest of us is to exile them from society. Anyone that's not on board with this can fuck off right along with them.

Since justice ain't working people are taking it upon themselves.

I normally agree with you about guilt by association, but these people are currently an IMMINENT threat to every living thing on the planet. I am truly ok with a small amount of collateral damage to excise the cancer before it STRANGLES US TO DEATH. They control everything. Every mechanism of power or change. We cannot allow them the very obvious influence over the extensive investigation that their position afford. We need to purge our power structures of this before anything else can be done about it.

At some point it comes down to incentives, to not shun such terrible people just helps increase their influence. Accepting their money makes it look like you think what they did isn't bad. Terms like greenwashing exists just highlight this problem, we have to make it clear it's unacceptable to behave like that and that you can not buy your way out of consequences.

It's basic risk assessment

Literally everything else you're talking about is solved by ensuring due process is followed

Science without morals and ethics leads to amazing developments, but often misguided or twisted understanding, and unbridled human suffering.

It's not enough to be a good scientist, one must also be a good person. The people involved with Epstein are UNREPENTANTLY evil. These are not people who are in the "grey" like a leper who was an untouchable or a murderer who killed unintentionally and regrets it their whole life. A true scientist doesn't need the law to tell them that someone is highly likely to be a monster when the evidence is mounting. Rather they would chase the evidence and do their best to make a decision based on the most logical outcome.

A good scientist who is also a good person must work to excise this toxicity from the scientific community.

Also, Budda and Jesus? A terrible bad faith argument, I can't dignify that with anything other than dismissal

This isn't necessarily about justice or guilt. They aren't being imprisoned or sentenced. An organization is choosing not to permit them where their members & the public gather, for "protection".

If these individuals were suspected of being in contact with a dangerous contagious disease, you'd hopefully not find it unscientific to minimize risk by telling them not to come to a convention.

But being a child rapist, or ASSOCIATING with child rapists isn't a contagious disease. No, but due to their association to members of a prolific child trafficing ring, they may be considered a higher risk for a certain subset of convention-goers (which claims to offer fun for people of all ages)

Well well well, this feels familiar. Pardoning Pedophiles? Ain't no such thing.

You had me in the first half, not gonna lie.