Deniers get banned from a forum.

[Down1]

Climate change deniers this time.
Reddit science forum is the place.
The loser mod wants MSM to follow suit.


The social news site Reddit is banning climate change deniers from its science forum, a moderator for the site said.

Nathan Allen, the moderator for the forum /r/science — which provides a digital space for people to discuss recent, peer-reviewed science publications — wrote about the move to ban skeptics of climate science on Grist. A representative for Reddit confirmed the decision with The Hill.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/193545-reddit-science-forum-banks-climate-change-deniers


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/193545-reddit-science-forum-banks-climate-change-deniers

[Libertytree]

I reckon that's what happens when ya don't follow the meme. Same as the rest.

[palani]

Nothing to deny other than the definition.

Climate change is defined as the HUMAN activities that affect the environment.

As long as you define it this way you have no basis for an argument. Whether the actual change is .0001% or 20% everyone will view the change as due to HUMAN activities.

Look at it this way ... if the change in environment is NOT due to HUMAN activities then what can HUMANs do to limit the change. The answer is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ... and there is no money to be made with this little bit of reality.

[Norweger]

People who use the words "Peer review" are always promoters of bullshit.

[Shami-Amourae]

Because you know it's a science when it's a religion.
:rolleyes:

[Blink]

Next it will be a crime.....

[Ponce]

Banning a person is like killing a person.......and soon they will use bullets instead of just banning someone from a forum...... I must have some kind of record for being banned from so many forums.

V

[Santa]

People who use the words "Peer review" are always promoters of bullshit.
This message has been peer reviewed and approved.

[Neuro]

People who use the words "Peer review" are always promoters of bullshit.
Absolutely! It's another word for centralized censorship. The peers are the gatekeepers and are elected secretely by the decision makers. Certainly there could be a few scientific journals that do a good and honest job of promoting true science, but it is important to realize that they manage to do this despite "peer review", not because of it. Most medical journals are primarily or to a large part financed by big pharma, overtly or covertly. The editor is the central guy appointed by a board that get speaking engagements payed by pharmaceutical industry. He/she decides what peer reviewed articles are published. Peer reviewers soon learn what they can allow, and if they ever want to advance to editor or board member they better tow the pharma line. It is no difference in climate 'science'. Now it is even getting acceptable to ban those who don't agree with catastrophic warming caused by humans and voice their dissent. Of course denier is something that was taken from the holohoax campaign, so that the average person has a clear connotation to the magnitude of these deniers crimes!