You're viewing a single thread.
Censorship of dissidence discussions due to "misinformation," "disinformation," and only allowing "science."
Our science institutions and media are just as corrupt as our politicians; that is why critical thinking should be encouraged instead of more censorship to baby the people.
Keeping predatory grifters away from health discourse is on a different level than discussions of differing opinions.
This person you’re replying to is basically Lemmy’s Goebbels.
So slightly right of Stalin? We know how you love to name call people
I don’t understand your comment, can you explain it please?
You like to call people names. I've seen you around, you do it a bit more often than most.
I don’t recognize you, what communities do you frequent?
You can just check my post history, it's public. But I mainly just go around on /all
Oh I’m not nearly that interested in you.
You really like to smear people anywhere you go.
Can't expect much from Satan, you bring shame to your name.
What are your thoughts on the Russian invasion of Ukraine?
Oh no... (We are about to see an explosion)
No they’ll just ignore it.
Can you explain why you believe that the science institutions are corrupt?
it's the exercise of soft power from the state that has always made academic pursuits suspect, if you go against the narrative you might find your funding cut. but I'm sure OP can speak for themselves.
How can you go against the narrative before you publish the research with some funding?
it's the threat of losing funding not the withholding of funding before the fact.
self censorship is much cheaper than any other form of enforcement.
As someone who's been a STEM researcher for about a decade, this person has no clue what they are talking about
Are you sure you’re not just self-censoring?
how many reproduction studies have you had published?
reproduction studies
What the hell are you talking about, what is a reproduction study?
You either mean a reproducible study or a study specifically on something reproducing which is irrelevant. Again you don't even know what you are talking about and 3 from college, I work in industry now so I don't publish. We also directly collaborate with a large university and a national laboratory, so I know a thing or two about how grant funding is acquired from both an academic and industrial side(industries such as mine actually fund studies that do get publicly published). There are absolutely issues with politics in academia, it just isn't what you are describing.
You either mean
can you clean my teeth while you're in there?
and I meant Replication Study thought you already answered that question.
and you think publishing won't allow journals to sell stories to the press and sell more copies and shake up the industry, leading to awareness and campaigns to fund the scientist? there's like no information online on self-censorship in academia, not even from 2nd world countries, so this sounds really sketchy.
that would be a nice world to live in wouldn't it.
the one thing that distinguishes "conspiracy" theories from plausible theories is the absence of evidence
Liar calls scrubbing of misinformation "censorship". In other news, bear shits in woods. More at 11.
liar
Joining in on the lemmy circle jerk of name calling those that don't fall in line to your status quo.
Cats are obligate carnivores. Forcing them on a vegan diet is animal abuse
I am not disputing that claim.
I am pointing out the "science" that started the whole event.
IIRC, it was a reputable source, not just some random website talking conspiracies.
🤦♀️
The mods were removed because they were deleting factual information