Current Events > Can't post this article on Facebook... try it.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.reddit.com/r/metacanada/comments/eknxyv/you_literally_cannot_post_this_financial_post/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

Really interesting, isn't it?

---

Thank god one scientist in the world is brave enough to turn down the leftist deep state's money and disprove human-affected climate change.

---

That subreddit description is pretty funny all things considered.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Thank god one scientist in the world is brave enough to turn down the leftist deep state's money and disprove human-affected climate change.

Regardless of opinion, it is interesting that an actual scientific study is blacklisted on social media.

---

dunno what you mean, I just sent it to like 5 friends easily

---

Turtlebread posted...

dunno what you mean, I just sent it to like 5 friends easily

The link IN the subreddit?

This one? https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/ross-mckitrick-this-scientist-proved-climate-change-isnt-causing-extreme-weather-so-politicians-attacked

---

That is one hell of a subreddit.
---

MaverickXeo posted...

Regardless of opinion, it is interesting that an actual scientific study is blacklisted on social media.

It's someone's opinion piece about someone else's interpretation of data.

It doesn't even make sense given that ignoring the idea of climate change has been the moneymaking decision for governments and big business.

---

You mean they won't let you post an article by a questionable source pushing a false narrative about a man who's work "disproving" climate change's effects is widely and resoundingly discredited and rejected by the climate science community?

OPPRESSIOONNNNNN!

Tenlaar posted...

You mean they won't let you post an article by a questionable source pushing a false narrative about a man who's work "disproving" climate change's effects is widely and resoundingly discredited and rejected by the climate science community?

OPPRESSIOONNNNNN!

That's exactly oppression. Deciding what people should and shouldn't be exposed to is not their call to make.

You've been spending to much time shilling for gamefaqs mods, friend

---

glitteringfairy posted...

Deciding what people should and shouldn't be exposed to is not their call to make.

You sure about that?

Tenlaar posted...

You sure about that?

Yea cause I'm not a fascist

---

glitteringfairy posted...

That's exactly oppression. Deciding what people should and shouldn't be exposed to is not their call to make.

You've been spending to much time shilling for gamefaqs mods, friend

I thought we hated fake news

---

glitteringfairy posted...

Deciding what people should and shouldn't be exposed to is not their call to make.

This.

Tenlaar posted...

You mean they won't let you post an article by a questionable source pushing a false narrative about a man who's work "disproving" climate change's effects is widely and resoundingly discredited and rejected by the climate science community?

OPPRESSIOONNNNNN!

Questionable source?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_A._Pielke_Jr.

You mean a professor who has done extensive studies on climate and natural disasters, who:

Prior to his positions at CU-Boulder, from 1993 to 2001 he was a staff scientist[3] in the Environmental and Societal Impacts Group of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. From 2002 to 2004 Pielke was Director of Graduate Studies for the CU-Boulder Graduate Program in Environmental Studies and in 2001 students selected him for the Outstanding Graduate Advisor Award. Pielke serves on numerous editorial boards and advisory committees, retains many professional affiliations, and sat on the Board of Directors of WeatherData, Inc. from 2001 to 2006. In 2012 he was awarded an honorary doctorate by Linkping University[4][5] and the Public Service Award of the Geological Society of America.[6]

There is also this:

[A "Guide to Climate Skeptics" published by foreignpolicy.com includes Pielke, and notes that his statements questioning graphs in the IPCC reports have led to him being considered by some a "denier" of climate change, though Pielke strongly objects to those labels.[14] His views on climate change have been widely criticized by scientists, including former US presidential science adviser John Holdren.[15][16] Pielke rejected Holdren's criticisms, saying "the facts are on my side",[17] and several publications defended Pielke.[18][19]

EDIT: Also right from the professor:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/987052536883376128.html

---

MaverickXeo posted...

Questionable source?

Yup.

Overall, we rate The Financial Post Right-Center Biased based on story selection and editorial bias that favors the right through the support of free markets and low regulation. We also rate them Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High, due to publishing misleading scientific information regarding climate change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_A._Pielke_Jr.

You mean a professor who has done extensive studies on climate and natural disasters, who:

It's strange that you stopped quoting the wikipedia page there. Why would you stop quoting it there, when it says this right below it?

FiveThirtyEight published a Pielke article in March 2014[23] that climate scientists Michael E. Mann and Kevin Trenberth criticized as "deeply misleading" and "demonstrably wrong" in interviews with ThinkProgress.[24] The scientists said that Pielke sent them threatening e-mails in response to their criticism, calling it "libelous"; Pielke responded that their characterization of his e-mails as "threatening" was "ridiculous". Legum told The Huffington Post that he contacted Nate Silver, the editor of FiveThirtyEight, which apologized to the two scientists for Pielke's behavior.[22] Other criticisms of Pielke's article followed.[25] The Guardian published an article by Dana Nuccitelli called "FiveThirtyEight undermines its brand by misrepresenting climate research",[26] and John Abraham wrote that Pielke's "conclusions are not taken seriously by myself and other climate scientists."[27]

Why are you linking to subreddits where the users are encouraging each other to move to Gab?

---

Damn, that subs description.

---

Tenlaar posted...

Yup.

It's strange that you stopped quoting the wikipedia page there. Why would you stop quoting it there, when it says this right below it?

The Financial Post IS right leaning - that is true. However, reading the article provides evidence to support Pielke's studies and doing a little more research can lead toward his actual papers and such. That said, why is a right-leaning source 'banned' but not left-leaning sources?

538 is not a 'research' platform. They analyze polls that are completed separately and form opinions on them (and are left leaning as well).

Mann's and Trenberth's research seem to relate more to trends in climate rather than Pielke's research data on human societal and economic factors.

One thing to note as well, Pielke was a climate scientist for over 20 years prior to his publication. Why did the community turn on him so suddenly - or in their position, why did he suddenly turn on everyone else?

---

MrMallard posted...

Why are you linking to subreddits where the users are encouraging each other to move to Gab?

No idea what Gab is.

... Ah, makes sense. Still, the article cannot be posted on Facebook despite being a legitimate piece.

---

"They're a right leaning site that has a history of publishing misleading information regarding climate change."
"But why are right leaning sources banned but not left leaning sources!?"

Yeahhhhh. Miss me with that shit, TC. You're pushing bunk.