3 ms·
> I was thinking the same thing. I started thinking the article was satire towards the end. I was expecting that it would be about climate scientists being gagg
by yowzadave 3y ago
> I was thinking the same thing. I started thinking the article was satire towards the end. I was expecting that it would be about climate scientists being gagged for not being alarmist enough or for presenting some evidence that went against the climate change narrative.
This comment is a good example of being primed to accept a particular narrative, assuming that the OP would confirm that bias, and then on discovering that it does not confirm that bias, reacting to reject the offending data point as a "psyop". A neat encapsulation of the challenge we have in communicating honestly with each other.
- jongjong 3y agoI think of myself as agnostic on climate change.... Maybe it's happening, maybe it's primarily man-made. Still, I just can't imagine in the current environment where the media blames literally everything on climate change that scientists would be reprimanded by politicians (who are themselves clearly in favor of climate alarmism) for being too alarmist. That does not add up for me. I've worked in the tech sector so I think I know what censorship and self-censorship feels like. I'm not sure these scientists do. It just doesn't add up.