If the scientific community overwhelmingly and independently comes to the same conclusion over and over again, insisting on being able to discuss other solutions, especially not in the context of academic exploration (because it IS important for the scientific process to check opposing hypothesis and to peer review) but in the Context of telling a baseless opinion easily disputed, then no.

That's like the people who insist on 'discussing other explanazions' for climate change.

And it is more than understandable that this insistence then is seen as the Opposite of good faith arguing and met with resistance. There is no point in giving a forum to harmful lies. That is not productive discourse