5 ms·

It's called "biomass" and it's a massive scam that harms the environment. Michael Moore and Jeff Gibbs released a recent documentary on it [0] that was censored

by Jerry2 6y ago

It's called "biomass" and it's a massive scam that harms the environment. Michael Moore and Jeff Gibbs released a recent documentary on it [0] that was censored by the "green" industry. As you watch the documentary, do some fact checking on your own [1]. [0] https://vimeo.com/423114384 https://vimeo.com/423114384 [1] https://planetofthehumans.com/fact-check-bible/ https://planetofthehumans.com/fact-check-bible/

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
tonyedgecombe 6y ago
That's the first time I heard that the "green" industry gets to censor what I watch. Comments like yours make me doubt objections to biomass. There is no need to use this sort of language if you have some real arguments against it.
- Jerry2 6y ago
  They did censor it. https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-youtube-michael-moore-jeff-gibbs-censorship-1202942938/ https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-you...
  - tonyedgecombe 6y ago
    That isn't censorship.
MaxBarraclough 6y ago
> do some fact checking on your own At a glance, it doesn't look good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Humans#Scientific_accuracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Humans#Scientifi... https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/28/climate-dangerous-documentary-planet-of-the-humans-michael-moore-taken-down https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/28/climate-...
- Jerry2 6y ago
  The Guardian is an extremely biased source. They even refused, multiple times, to run an Op-Ed from the creators. https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-youtube-michael-moore-jeff-gibbs-censorship-1202942938/ https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-you...
  - MaxBarraclough 6y ago
    They insist on spinning the YouTube takedown issue as 'blatant censorship', but in fact the YouTube video received a copyright takedown notice from a photographer whose content the film uses, not from some green energy lobby. That alone seems like enough to bring the filmmakers' credibility into serious doubt. It doesn't seem crystal clear at a glance whether the copyright complaint is well founded, or if it's fair-use, but I don't see that it matters much either way. Spinning it as 'blatant censorship' seems pretty silly. Even discounting this, and the Guardian article, Wikipedia lists a number of serious issues with the film.
Pfhreak 6y ago
Do you mean censored or censured? The two words are similar, but I have a hard time imagining how the "green industry" (who is this, btw?) could censor something.
gruez 6y ago
>that was censored by the "green" industry Can you elaborate on this? How was this done?
- Jerry2 6y ago
  Certain interests filed DMCA takedown notices after the movie has accumulated over 8 million views on Youtube. Michael Moore talks about it in his podcast and you can also read about it on their website: https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-youtube-michael-moore-jeff-gibbs-censorship-1202942938/ https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-you...

by Jerry2 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

tonyedgecombe 6y ago

That's the first time I heard that the "green" industry gets to censor what I watch. Comments like yours make me doubt objections to biomass. There is no need to use this sort of language if you have some real arguments against it.

Jerry2 6y ago
They did censor it. https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-youtube-michael-moore-jeff-gibbs-censorship-1202942938/ https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-you...
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  That isn't censorship.

MaxBarraclough 6y ago

> do some fact checking on your own At a glance, it doesn't look good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Humans#Scientific_accuracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Humans#Scientifi... https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/28/climate-dangerous-documentary-planet-of-the-humans-michael-moore-taken-down https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/28/climate-...

Jerry2 6y ago
The Guardian is an extremely biased source. They even refused, multiple times, to run an Op-Ed from the creators. https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-youtube-michael-moore-jeff-gibbs-censorship-1202942938/ https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-you...
- MaxBarraclough 6y ago
  They insist on spinning the YouTube takedown issue as 'blatant censorship', but in fact the YouTube video received a copyright takedown notice from a photographer whose content the film uses, not from some green energy lobby. That alone seems like enough to bring the filmmakers' credibility into serious doubt. It doesn't seem crystal clear at a glance whether the copyright complaint is well founded, or if it's fair-use, but I don't see that it matters much either way. Spinning it as 'blatant censorship' seems pretty silly. Even discounting this, and the Guardian article, Wikipedia lists a number of serious issues with the film.

Pfhreak 6y ago

Do you mean censored or censured? The two words are similar, but I have a hard time imagining how the "green industry" (who is this, btw?) could censor something.

gruez 6y ago

>that was censored by the "green" industry Can you elaborate on this? How was this done?

Jerry2 6y ago
Certain interests filed DMCA takedown notices after the movie has accumulated over 8 million views on Youtube. Michael Moore talks about it in his podcast and you can also read about it on their website: https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-youtube-michael-moore-jeff-gibbs-censorship-1202942938/ https://deadline.com/2020/05/planet-of-the-humans-pulled-you...