> This whole "see, we wuz right!" thing is a bit bizarre given that no, people didn't ignore evidence early on. They ignored a theory based upon literally nothing, generally put forward by people arguing that it was somehow weaponized and intentional. If there is evidence it should be pursued, but that doesn't give credence to hysterical conspiracies.

It's not so much that they just ignored the theory, but that they made it taboo.

Now, I empathize somewhat with the people who made it taboo (I probably helped in an amateur capacity, throwing the baby out with the bathwater), but in retrospect it's embarrassing and one would have hoped the professionals would have done a better job.