Someone who caves to the narrative to be published, and then comes here speaking the truth made this article infuriating from start to finish.
I think of every doctor, scientist, teacher, employee, citizen who has been speaking against all the recent narratives - with guts, with loss of work, loss of relationships and they are the ones to…
Someone who caves to the narrative to be published, and then comes here speaking the truth made this article infuriating from start to finish.
I think of every doctor, scientist, teacher, employee, citizen who has been speaking against all the recent narratives - with guts, with loss of work, loss of relationships and they are the ones to commend.
Should papers, editors and media accept the whole story for publication- yes! But it relies on the people submitting to have the courage to speak truth even if it it’s denied over and over. That’s how we get change.
Otoh if he spoke out but was not published in these journals, the Wokesters and the journal would accuse him of being jealous and deny his research was rejected because it doesn't fit their narrative. They'll just claim his research was weak or wrong.
Agreed. This paper bugged me quite a bit. It’s great to speak out about the problems researchers are facing but to contribute to the narrative just to make a name for yourself makes things worse for the people that are trying to fight against the narrative.
I know people that would use this article as a weapon to prove their mainstream bias when the reality is that information was withheld and edited out to fit the narrative. So as much as an article here on FP seems to raise awareness, the damage has already been done. The attempt to gain credibility just created a tool that will be used to mislead people. It doesn’t help build a body of knowledge that combats the mainstreams narrative.
An honest paper with credible research dealing with the actual realities of climate change - the ones referenced in this article - would have significantly more impact than this FP article even if it’s in a less prestigious journal. Like Megan said that’s how change happens. If the authors career was focused on publishing honest information and he got more and more researchers on board to help combat the narrative and present a more balanced view of the problem then maybe something would change.
All the journals that straddle the academic and general interest areas - Nature, Science, Scientific American - have been captured by progressive ideology. All have had papers published referring to "pregnant people". It's become my litmus test for whether or not to trust a publication.
Someone who caves to the narrative to be published, and then comes here speaking the truth made this article infuriating from start to finish.
I think of every doctor, scientist, teacher, employee, citizen who has been speaking against all the recent narratives - with guts, with loss of work, loss of relationships and they are the ones to commend.
Should papers, editors and media accept the whole story for publication- yes! But it relies on the people submitting to have the courage to speak truth even if it it’s denied over and over. That’s how we get change.
Otoh if he spoke out but was not published in these journals, the Wokesters and the journal would accuse him of being jealous and deny his research was rejected because it doesn't fit their narrative. They'll just claim his research was weak or wrong.
Otoh if he spoke out but was not published in these journals, the aw
Agreed. This paper bugged me quite a bit. It’s great to speak out about the problems researchers are facing but to contribute to the narrative just to make a name for yourself makes things worse for the people that are trying to fight against the narrative.
I know people that would use this article as a weapon to prove their mainstream bias when the reality is that information was withheld and edited out to fit the narrative. So as much as an article here on FP seems to raise awareness, the damage has already been done. The attempt to gain credibility just created a tool that will be used to mislead people. It doesn’t help build a body of knowledge that combats the mainstreams narrative.
An honest paper with credible research dealing with the actual realities of climate change - the ones referenced in this article - would have significantly more impact than this FP article even if it’s in a less prestigious journal. Like Megan said that’s how change happens. If the authors career was focused on publishing honest information and he got more and more researchers on board to help combat the narrative and present a more balanced view of the problem then maybe something would change.
All the journals that straddle the academic and general interest areas - Nature, Science, Scientific American - have been captured by progressive ideology. All have had papers published referring to "pregnant people". It's become my litmus test for whether or not to trust a publication.