I think this is the correct answer. HN goes to extensive efforts to avoid flame wars in comments, and in the one post on the topic I saw reach the front page (before being removed), the comments were an absolute hellhole.
I didn't flag it, but when I last looked all the comments were of people about as well informed as the author and I filed under "trash fire, don't get involved".
Nearly all of the document's factual claims are squarely in the middle of academic consensus. If you find the arguments morally troubling, just say so, but don't contribute to the raving anti-scientific delusions of the blank-slate crowd.
