The Climate Censors
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 มิ.ย. 2021
- Facebook censors my video, calling it “partly false.”
----
To make sure you receive the weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: johnstossel.activehosted.com/f/1
----
Before Facebook censored it, my video, “Are We Doomed”, got more 24 million views.
You can watch it here: • Are We Doomed?
Now Facebook won't show it to many people - not even to my subscribers. Facebook's also punishing Stossel TV by showing our other videos less.
All because Facebook foolishly gave Emmanuel Vincent, a recent PhD graduate from France, the power to censor.
Vincent assembled a group of like-minded scientists into a group called Climate Feedback climatefeedback.org that declared parts of my video “misleading," or "partially false."
What facts did the “fact-checkers” correct? NONE! There was not a single hard fact that in the video that was wrong.
We address the censor’s claims here, listing our sources: www.johnstossel.com/climate-f...
I asked one Vincent “reviewer,” the only one willing to be interviewed, why I deserve censorship even though our facts were correct.
“The problem is the omission of contextual information rather than specific "facts" being "wrong,”" says Patrick Brown, Assistant Professor at San Jose State University.
Some “fact-check."
“What kills me,” I complain to Brown, “is that when Climate Feedback rates me partly false, that significantly reduces the number of people who see it -- and see my other videos. So this is really important to me that it be done fairly.”
“I am sympathetic with what you're saying,” he responds. “At the same time as a
consumer of information, I like the idea of having some type of system where content can be compared to what experts think.”
But Facebook’s choice of "experts" is absurd.
Emmanuel Vincent proudly says “all the climate scientists that I know personally agree that climate change is real, that it’s serious, and we can do something about it.”
Well, of course climate change is real! But how serious a threat it is, and whether we can do much about it with today’s technology deserves debate. Victor’s little group STOPS debate.
Remarkably, Facebook lets them.
Watch the video above and decide for yourself.
_"Your science is partly false."_
"What's false about it?"
_"Well, your facts are correct, but it's not put into_ context."
"We put it all in context. What are you saying is out of context?"
_"It's not that it's out of context, it's your_ tone."
"What about my other video?"
_"We don't know, we didn't watch it."_
"Why are you doing this?"
_"Well, we need some control over what people see."_
Everywhere I look it's 1984 these days.
Also said that it was his tone they didn't like.
time to go Project Veritas on these factcheckers.
@@phillhuddleston9445 Hence _"It's not that it's out of context, it's your_ tone."
@@hochhaul oo its Orwellian ish going on I assure you
This was the ONE guy who would actually talk. Imagine how bad the rest of that panel is.
He seemed pretty reasonable to me. I found him likeable.
@@maxschindler3535 He admitted that they "fact checked" him because they didn't like the "tone" of his piece. I give him credit for coming on and being honest, but not much because he STILL tried to defend censoring the truth because they didn't like the way it sounded.
@@maxschindler3535 true but he was still ultimately supporting a completely unfair censorship policy on Facebook
Even he was full of it. He doesn't really believe what he's saying.
@Ryan Alex This guy probably got fired, considering how tame he was compared to his workmates.
When you silence someone, that doesn't end the argument or solve the problem, it only shows you fear what they have to say. Food for thought.
Patrick Brown deserves a lot of credit for agreeing to be interviewed and for being open about his opinions and reasoning. And kudos to John Stossel for having him on and engaging him in dialogue.
Props to the guy for doing an interview
he is certainly part of the problem
@@dougmoore4653 At least he did the interview which is progress
The others might have terrified for speaking out...
@@dougmoore4653 which we wouldn't understand if he hadn't spoke with John, I say we give him diplomatic immunity :D
Less props and I think more he was too dumb to realize he would only expose himself.
He probably didn't watch the video and figured "Oh I'll just shame him and he'll drop this act" then quickly realized...
"OH...idk what I'm saying"
Seriously, he basically just agreed with Stossel this whole interview but doubled down on his censorship, anyway.
A brilliant physicist commented that "I would rather have questions that cannot be answered than answers that can't be questioned" Science is all about questioning things.
That's different than questioning science though.
👍
if you're not questioning EVERYTHING you aren't doing science.
@@greenandgold2185 "Science" is a method of empirical inquiry, NOT a set of dogmas that must be adhered to without question!
@@greenandgold2185 boy did that go over ur head... go sit down before u hurt urself...
*Facebook:* “we face check people because we value scientific truth”
*Also Facebook:* “how much are you gonna pay us for essential oil and get rich quick ads?!?!?”
I despise Fascistbook and its gaslighting corruption. I will never log in there again. I hope it goes the way of MySpace really soon.
I respect that guy for coming on to talk when most wouldn't.
Science begs to be questioned... it glories in it. Propaganda, not so much.
Amazingly well said.
Feynman's essay on doubt. The foundation of science is doubt. This doubt shaming is disgusting.
It's always possible for every scientist to be wrong. Science has never given true facts, just the best answers with the ever expanding data we have at the time.
I always take scientists word with a grain of salt. And I always ignore them if they're publicly funded by government.
It's also commonplace for scientific consensus to be overturned. It happens continuously. Not so with groupthink.
"I would rather have a question that can't be answered than an answer that can't be questioned."
- Richard Feynman
Yeah, but the problem is that Feynman was actually doing science and that's what he wanted to do. The people who want answers that cannot be questioned don't actually do science or want to do science, they want to be PERCEIVED as smart people who do science. They want to be perceived as knowing something and having the answers, without having to do all of that actual hard boring work of verifying their data and validating their conclusions.
@deepfriedsammich wow, great point! Science is MOSTLY a lot of hard work that never gets seen, tedious experiments that often fail, boring mind-numbing data analysis. Most people have no idea how science is really done. We want instant gratification with all areas of our lives. That’s just not possible when the scientific method is performed correctly. Just look at the trouble the physics community has had in the last 40-50 years trying to reconcile relativity with quantum theory.
Feynman was a genius for sure.
Isaac Asimov said the foundation of science is doubt; absolute certainty is the realm of religion.
@@deepfriedsammich you have hit the nail on the head.
Once terms like "denialist" and "the science is settled" are used you know the fix is in.
Exactly. It's a form of zealotry.
You don't get to choose your own facts in science, and out in the real world, there is a compelling chain of scientific evidence PROVING human activity (mostly burning fossil fuels) is driving global warming, humans caused ~100% of all net global warming over the last 140 years, all the main predictions of the theory of man-made global warming have come true and 14 different climate models--some dating back to the 1970s and 1980s have all accurately predicted how much warming would by caused by our emissions. In a nutshell, the scientists have this figured out and we have passed 99% certainty that human activity is warming the planet.
Furthermore, the science is very clear that our excess CO2 emissions are driving substantial disruption of usual climate patterns, generating increasingly-intense heat waves, droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, and precipitation events while accelerating global ice melt, sea level rise, and the steady deterioration of the health of Earth’s ecosystems. Man-made global warming has already killed half the coral reefs that once existed, and unless we change course, the casualties and expenses for humans and other species will just keep piling up.
I have only one thing to say to all that. Absolute rubbish.
@@karlwheatley1244 A true "believer" of the "experts".
If someone says "the science it's settled" they are selling you something. Scientists can disagree with one another. Interpret data differently. Prioritize things differently. Disagreement is a part of the process.
Yes, "settled science" is an oxymoron. Science is always open to new information, and new conclusions.
Yes--it was once "settled science" that the Sun, Moon, planets, and stars went around the fixed, non-rotating Earth once every 24 hours--until the telescope and improved astronomical observations utilizing it proved otherwise. The history of science is replete with other such examples.
Settled science = Lysenkoist science
👌🏻
"I guess it was just the tone of it."
- The FACT checker
The Rothschilds and the secret societies are the enemy. JFK tried to warn us about them before he died
A tragic and embarrassing admission by someone that's complicit in ANTI-SCIENCE fascism being fostered by big tech.
This is a reason a teenage girl would give.
Literal tone-policing.
You didn't say it right... What do you call somebody that does that?
ANNDDD TH-cam puts a "Context" card about climate change at the bottom on this video. That's just golden.
Context that links you to WIKIPEDIA... like wtf at least a peer reviewed article
@@evilmonkeylords Dude, Wikipedia is peer reviewed. My friend totally looked it over & said it was fine - & if it wasn't, he'd edit it during lunch between his shifts at 7/11
Maybe I should apply for a google job- seems like the standards are low these days…
Thank god they put some context on an aliens abduction video I watched. I might have believed aliens are real.
@@evilmonkeylords Painfully ironic considering Wikipedia itself is forced to concede that "Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source". I guess the dolts that decided to cite Wikipedia didn't learn anything in college, where citing Wikipedia was a great way to earn an F.
God Bless John Stossel. And props to Brown for having the guts to show up even though he's wrong.
This quote always comes to mind when people want to silence their opposition in a discussion. Only one side of the conversation wants to end the conversation. That’s very telling.
When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.
-George R.R. Martin
I also love how TH-cam puts a link to Wikipedia on any video that discusses climate change. As if Wikipedia is a reliable source.
Some people still think it is. Many of my college professors had to remind every class that wiki is not a valid primary source for a research paper. So people are still doing it.
I think it's just a ruse to make you think that you don't need to read an "authoritative" source to know this, implying that "everybody with a brain gets it!" or something to that effect.
Yes.
Even better is when someone references Snopes as a source of truth...
It's reliable: reliable for pushing our agenda... and if it isn't we'll edit it until it is ;-)
Anyone who says "dont question the science!" isnt a real scientist
100%
If you thought science was certain well, that's just an error on your part.
Richard Feynman, Noble Laureate in Physics
"I'd rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that cannot be questioned".
@@victorchiappetta3230 The science is settled but they still want more government grants to do the science...
@@victorchiappetta3230 anyone who hides behind “but the Science says”
Has never once in their life been a part of the scientific/research community.
It literally consists of people who’s sole underlying purpose is to disagree with each other every day. That’s their job.
To say it’s “settled” is disingenuous at best and outright malicious at worst.
I have this crazy idea. We should have this worldwide forum where people can share their ideas and we can find what the best idea is through meaningful discussion.
You can't reason with, persuade or argue with an ideologue.
I assume you mean John Stossel? Stossel's misinformation aside, there is a compelling chain of scientific evidence PROVING human activity (mostly burning fossil fuels) is driving global warming, humans caused ~100% of all net global warming over the last 140 years, all the main predictions of the theory of man-made global warming have come true and 14 different climate models--some dating back to the 1970s and 1980s have all accurately predicted how much warming would by caused by our emissions. In a nutshell, the scientists have this figured out and we have passed 99% certainty that human activity is warming the planet.
Furthermore, the science is very clear that our excess CO2 emissions are driving substantial disruption of usual climate patterns, generating increasingly-intense heat waves, droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, and precipitation events while accelerating global ice melt, sea level rise, and the steady deterioration of the health of Earth’s ecosystems. Man-made global warming has already killed half the coral reefs that once existed, and unless we change course, the casualties and expenses for humans and other species will just keep piling up.
@@karlwheatley1244 There is no evidence whatsoever that any significant component of climate is being changed by use of fossil fuels in any significant manner, especially since anthropogenic CO2 is only 0.00132% of the atmosphere. It is incontrovertibly true that not one single climate model is predictively correct or even predictively approximate and not one current climate model has passed basic validation. The evidence is absolutely clear that carbon dioxide emissions are not in any way causing increasingly intense heat waves, droughts, fires, hurricanes or rain, and in fact these are not increasing in intensity or frequency at all. Man made global warming has not killed any coral reefs, let alone half of them. In fact there is not a single data measurement outside the normal range. From your blithering, I can only assume that you are an imbecile, but I expect you'll remain so, since there's no reasoning with or persuading ideologues.
When you hear somebody say “Follow The Science”, they are usually talking about political science.
Bravo!
If you follow the science you'll find the same politicians saying an ice age is coming in the 70's.
Unless it's Fauci. He IS THE SCIENCE! Fact checked by himself. He thinks it's true, so 100% of the scientists HE knows agree. And since he calls himself a scientist, that makes him one ....
Holy crap. I'm getting dizzy.
Well the ones he knows personally... says it all
well the ones he knows when its politically or socially convenient at the time he won't debate but he would rather censor then challenge or actual debate ideas what happen to asking questions now its about silence opposition not question your opposition odd...
Yeah I wasn't aware asking your pals was a part of checking facts.
@@ragnarok7976 haha as if Facebook knows what facts are please they never do its always bias and partsian hell they work with that one organization that is in washington D.C.
Close friends in keeping secrets (or else):
13 And it came to pass that Akish gathered in unto the house of Jared all his kinsfolk, and said unto them: Will ye swear unto me that ye will be faithful unto me in the thing which I shall desire of you?
14 And it came to pass that they all sware unto him, by the God of heaven, and also by the heavens, and also by the earth, and by their heads, that whoso should vary from the assistance which Akish desired should lose his head; and whoso should divulge whatsoever thing Akish made known unto them, the same should lose his life.
15 And it came to pass that thus they did agree with Akish. And Akish did administer unto them the oaths which were given by them of old who also sought power, which had been handed down even from Cain, who was a murderer from the beginning.
16 And they were kept up by the power of the devil to administer these oaths unto the people, to keep them in darkness, to help such as sought power to gain power, and to murder, and to plunder, and to lie, and to commit all manner of wickedness and whoredoms.
17 And it was the daughter of Jared who put it into his heart to search up these things of old; and Jared put it into the heart of Akish; wherefore, Akish administered it unto his kindred and friends, leading them away by fair promises to do whatsoever thing he desired.
18 And it came to pass that they formed a secret combination, even as they of old; which combination is most abominable and wicked above all, in the sight of God;
19 For the Lord worketh not in secret combinations, neither doth he will that man should shed blood, but in all things hath forbidden it, from the beginning of man.
20 And now I, Moroni, do not write the manner of their oaths and combinations, for it hath been made known unto me that they are had among all people, and they are had among the Lamanites.
21 And they have caused the destruction of this people of whom I am now speaking, and also the destruction of the people of Nephi.
22 And whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed; for the Lord will not suffer that the blood of his saints, which shall be shed by them, shall always cry unto him from the ground for vengeance upon them and yet he avenge them not.
23 Wherefore, O ye Gentiles, it is wisdom in God that these things should be shown unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you, which are built up to get power and gain-and the work, yea, even the work of destruction come upon you, yea, even the sword of the justice of the Eternal God shall fall upon you, to your overthrow and destruction if ye shall suffer these things to be.
24 Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this secret combination which shall be among you; or wo be unto it, because of the blood of them who have been slain; for they cry from the dust for vengeance upon it, and also upon those who built it up.
25 For it cometh to pass that whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries; and it bringeth to pass the destruction of all people, for it is built up by the devil, who is the father of all lies; even that same liar who beguiled our first parents, yea, even that same liar who hath caused man to commit murder from the beginning; who hath hardened the hearts of men that they have murdered the prophets, and stoned them, and cast them out from the beginning.
26 Wherefore, I, Moroni, am commanded to write these things that evil may be done away, and that the time may come that Satan may have no power upon the hearts of the children of men, but that they may be persuaded to do good continually, that they may come unto the fountain of all righteousness and be saved.
-Excerpt is from Ether 8 in "The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ". If you want to read more, you can do so freely at the library portion of churchofjesuschrist dot org (text not linked because of filters)
Facebook suppressed the story about Burisma and the former VP’s son.
Do you see a pattern of conflict of interests? To recap:
The person who leads Facebook’s election integrity efforts used to work for the former VP of the United States and is currently a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.
The Atlantic Council received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Burisma, where the former VP’s son was on the board of directors.
The Atlantic Council partnered with Facebook to monitor election misinformation.
"policing information" - Solution = stop policing what no one has any business policing "FREE SPEECH" I can figure out what to believe or not on my own
Just throwing this out there… every Facebook user has the capability to return the favor by leaving the platform.
Exactly, Jody Fleming! I have never--and will never--use social media, for that very reason (and none of those platforms is "free"; the users are the used [the product], and they also exact a cost in stress, anger, frustration, and wasted time that their members can never get back!).
Way ahead of you bro. I don't use google either.
Done!
@@guysmiley4830 Not using Google is a little tougher. You have to really go out of your way to find a phone that does not have Android on it, or isn't an iPhone (Apple is just as bad as Google).
But then you cell provider is likely in deep cahoots with both and even if you do happen to locate a 3rd party os phone, at some point in the chain, you are still feeding Google, they are everywhere.
So, good luck with that.
If only they would.
Those who cannot do, teach. Those that cannot teach, fact check.
Or become 'critics of those who can do or teach'; right? Lols
I hate that saying. Many teachers DO and CHOOSE to teach because they want more people to have the opportunity.
Those who cannot fact check win the us presidency in 2020 by fraud.
@@James_Bee , You're very right.....are you a teacher, James?
@@Kay-tc3go I am a teacher. I'm conservative. I go in and teach my curriculum (which has nothing to do with any political cause). I do not engage any topics that are not curriculum related and do not share my political or religious leanings. This is how it should be in many, if not most, professions.
"Follow the science... And Greta Thunberg" - Climate alarmists
How dare you!!!!!!
@@chefbillybaroo2056 I think ( hope ) it's sarcasm. Shameful that people even pay attention to this teenager.
@@chefbillybaroo2056
I'm a little familiar with autism
and alarmism ....that girl displays signs of one but definitely not both.
How dare they shamelessly use a disability to pitch their shit.
One of only three plays in the Marxist playbook
@@stellarocquie7957 yes it's sarcasm how did she get so outraged when I was her age I don't care what the hell's going on in the world I'm just checking out the girls and she should be checking out the boys or whatever it's all her parents they're activists it's a shame she didn't have a childhood!!!!
Thunberg is a known puppet. Google to find her accidentally posting her handler's instructions on Twitter.
I think the real take away from this is others controlling others, we ALL should thank John for making all of this public and again for continuing reporting it.
The problem is you disagree with climate radicals, that’s not permitted!
...the *real* problem is that he didn't disagree with them enough.
Someone’s making money..
What you are calling "climate radicals" are the truth tellers: There is a compelling chain of scientific evidence PROVING human activity (mostly burning fossil fuels) is driving global warming, humans caused ~100% of all net global warming over the last 140 years, all the main predictions of the theory of man-made global warming have come true and 14 different climate models--some dating back to the 1970s and 1980s have all accurately predicted how much warming would by caused by our emissions. In a nutshell, the scientists have this figured out and we have passed 99% certainty that human activity is warming the planet.
Furthermore, the science is very clear that our excess CO2 emissions are driving substantial disruption of usual climate patterns, generating increasingly-intense heat waves, droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, and precipitation events while accelerating global ice melt, sea level rise, and the steady deterioration of the health of Earth’s ecosystems. Man-made global warming has already killed half the coral reefs that once existed, and unless we change course, the casualties and expenses for humans and other species will just keep piling up.
@@karlwheatley1244 what you're talking about is fallacious logic and a complete misrepresentation of the facts. I seriously recommend Tony Heller's channel.
@@ravecaster What you're saying is that he is wrong, but you don't say why.
I missed the part where he apologies for participating in censoring you.
Hahahah true
apologies are not in the alarmists dictionary
He seemed kind of smarky to me, i respect that he came on here to talk to john, but he reeks of holier than thou bs
You didn't miss it
Leftists never, ever apologize for anything, because in their minds they are perfect, infallible gods who walk the earth, so why should they apologize to their inferiors? Does anyone think that the omniscient "fact checkers" will ever apologize for smearing as "conspiracy theorists" the people who suggested that Covid may have leaked from a Chinese lab? Never gonna happen.
“Well you aren’t wrong but we’re gonna take you down anyway”
"...because it doesn't fit our Narrative."
All your facts are correct, but your tone didn't meet the required level of hysteria.
It’s a narrative check not a fact check
When they say "fact-check," what they mean is "fact-STOP," rather than "fact-EXAMINE." (i.e. "A system of CHECKS and balances")
The Party is always right.
I watch, I donate, I believe you, Mr. Stossel. Do not give up!
The only TH-cam videos worth watching are the ones with "context" warnings.
Expect the one created by flat earthers. And I mean not the people who are laughing at flat earthers and changing them to explain.
@@brianjohnson5620 I would actually prefer flat earth content over more pretend green Nazi control bullshit artists that want to take my money and consume yet more of my work for free.
Tony Heller makes videos of his dogs running around with no spoken words... and he still gets a climate change context warning.
@@brianjohnson5620 the left love human sheep they are easy to control, tell them they need to pay more taxes if they CARE and they will pay, tell them they need to give up their rights and they roll right over.
"the time for debate is over" is what dictators say, not scientists
Andreas, is the time for debate over on gravity, heliocentrism?
@@grahamhodge8313 As more information is gathered the models change. That is why science (specifically utilizing the scientific method) is NEVER settled. When someone asks a stupid question about gravity, for example, answer it and set him straight. If, instead, you effect the silencing of that person/idea, you are no longer engaged in science, but politics.
"The solution to bad speech is more speech." --John Stuart Mill
You can also argue the same is true about incorrect or false claims, such as those regarding climate change.
I will say that scientists do get a little frustrated at people presenting old debunked ideas as brand new.
In fact students at university used to do that every single year, for those research scientists also engaged in teaching. So some patience is a virtue.
Debate should be normal but the armies of the less informed can seem overwhelming , which in turn creates a bunker mentality where researchers retreat and then shut out novel ideas.
And they also in the public sphere need to battle against those with agendas or some form of mental illness which is tough. How do you distinguish enthusiastic questioning of science to learn versus circular reasoning of the insane and still get work done?
It’s a tough one.
@@elementalargon7597 I look forward to your criticism of the Newton/Einsteinian theory of gravitation.
@@grahamhodge8313 We can debate gravity. why not? Go get evidence to disprove gravity.
Mr. Stossel, thank you for bringing forth real facts forth to the public.
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.”
― Richard Feynman
We don’t need mommy n daddy to keep us from seeing “misinformation”. Let us see everything and form our own opinion. “Policing misinformation” is code for controlling the narrative.
Well said!
Edit - exact quote:
"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say." - Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones.
If that is a quote by another; please indicate the author. I like the quote, very true!
@@Kay-tc3go Just because you cut out a mans tongue doesn't prove him a liar, it just shows the world you fear what he might say. Tyrion Lannister game of thrones by George R R Martin.
@@JAG-xf2hm Okay, thanks.
@@Kay-tc3go Fixed.
If only it actually worked that way. I'd say the majority just labels them a liar and moves on.
Regardless of the topic, I love Stossel videos so much. He presents things in a simple/clear way so that anyone can consume it - but, always with depth and self-skepticism at the same time. If he's got a viewpoint, he's upfront about it, and always invites opponents to have their say. Honestly such an inspiration in this age of impoverished journalism.
"How dare you!"
Good way to wrap up the video!
“Scientists” claiming “consensus” are immediately not scientists. What a joke
They can claim consensus just as long as it not an artificial consensus. What is a not scientific is censoring idea counter to that consensus for arbitrary reasons.
Real science has nothing to do with official-science-consensus like Lyssenko in the USSR.
Lightning is the main cause of canadian forest fires, check it !
The scientist and his scientist friends all agree that no one can disagree...surprise 🤯
Scientific consensus in science: An idea is refined until there is consensus.
Scientific consensus in politics: The consensus is refined until it matches the idea.
Oh yeah, we’ve seen how well “science” has done in the last few years.
There is a war on truth and fear is the primary weapon.
When I clicked on this in my email, I got a notice form TH-cam that this video was private, but when i went to Stossel TV I got through to TH-cam and was able to watch the video
It’s all agenda-based. Never been about science.
It's another moral panic that will fade away. And they will be seen as the villains in the history books.
and when the science fits the agenda, they tell you to follow the science.
"Hide the decline! Hide the decline! Don't question The Narrative!"
@@mobiusraptor7 climate change has been going on for decades, they wont let free votes and money go to waste
Out in the real world and away from echo chambers like this one, there is a compelling chain of scientific evidence PROVING human activity (mostly burning fossil fuels) is driving global warming, In fact, humans caused ~100% of all net global warming over the last 140 years, all the main predictions of the theory of man-made global warming have come true, and 14 different climate models--some dating back to the 1970s and 1980s have all accurately predicted how much warming would by caused by our emissions. In a nutshell, the scientists have this figured out and we have passed 99% certainty that human activity is warming the planet.
Furthermore, the science is very clear that our excess CO2 emissions are driving substantial disruption of usual climate patterns, generating increasingly-intense heat waves, droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, and precipitation events while accelerating global ice melt, sea level rise, and the steady deterioration of the health of Earth’s ecosystems. Man-made global warming has already killed half the coral reefs that once existed, and unless we change course, the casualties and expenses for humans and other species will just keep piling up.
Brown: "It's not the mainstream view." So we are now only allowed to have one view?
They are deaf to their own stupidity.
the "mainstream View" is what is known as "Argumentum Ad Populum" - it wasn't a valid argument in ancient Greece, and it's not a valid argument now.
Can you imagine if we just declared the mainstream view as our guiding light throughout history where we would be right now?
@@RedwoodTheElf Some people will never learn... Specialy medicore "yes men" academics types
@@johnhamilton5369 thats actualy terrifing thought.. Lol
Good job John, thanks for fighting the good fight. All we want is the truth, the uncensored truth and we can make up our own minds. Thank you for your courage.
How are they honestly going to be hired by a publisher to fact check information when they’re not even watching the videos?
George Carlin: "We're so self important, so self important, everybody's gonna save something now. Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails! And the biggest arrogance of all, save the planet. What? Are these f**king people kidding me? Save the planet? We don't even know how to take care of ourselves yet! We haven't learned to care for one another, we're gonna save the f**king planet? I'm getting tired of that shit, tired of that shit!"
I wish we still had George to make fun of all this nonsense. When your born, you get a ticket to the show. If your born in America you get a front row seat!
That's it!
@@pallidbustofpallas4679 He wouldn't be able to make a living NPCs have no sense of humor or self.😁
@@pallidbustofpallas4679 I agree with you, but liberals would have none of that. He’d be canceled, very quickly.
The planet is fine. It's the people who are effed.
"fact cheekers" that's a weird thing to call a Inquisition
It's funny how even if you give people the smallest amount of power, they will fu.k it up.
I prefer Mintruth (Ministry of Truth).
Such a fan of yours. I wish you would do an extended podcast tackling our most difficult issues. I think the majority of people are not that far apart but need a voice of reason in a political world full of divisionism.
I'm sorry that we live in a day and age when people pay lip service to freedom of speech while taking advantage of free speech and then limiting the free speech of others, calling it "fact-checking" when in reality it is nothing more than political censorship. I don't look at your page every day, but I do take the time to go back and watch videos I've missed. I appreciate and support your work.
If the sea level was rising substantially, the Obamas wouldn't have bought that 11+ million dollar house on the seashore of Martha's Vineyard.
Exactly. And banks would not give out 30 year mortgages if they thought climate change was real.
@@jackieblue787 Why ? If your house falls into the sea, due to climate change - it won't be insured and you will still owe the bank the money. Only loser is you. If its true - you lose everything, if its not you lose nothing.
And what are you really being asked to do? - Switch to an energy source that is cheaper and cleaner.
Funny, when it's put like that, its a no brainer - no matter where you stand on climate, the switch makes sense.
According to Al Gore, I’m replying to you from under 20 ft of water. 😆
@@jonovens7974 Because no one ever defaults on their mortgages after their house is ruined, whether by fire, flood or tornado. The BANK is also taking a risk and a bank would NOT mortgage a house if they believed it was going to be under water. It's apparent that you're not a homeowner, goofy ass. Every one, including BANKS know that man made "climate change" is a crock. Go watch Tony Heller on youtube and wake up. It's so stupid.
@@jackieblue787 Heller, OMFG, are people still watching that shill, well, well.
Did the financial crash or the pandemic, completely pass you by ? At what point were the banks "at risk" ? Money in the future, as in the past, will be funnelled from public funds (your money) to private enterprise. "to protect business and JOBS"
And that private enterprise will use that money to make the silly rich even richer (with your money)
If you want a conspiracy, at least go for the one that is continually pissing in your face, and laughing at you because you are saying "thank you, give me more".
Greta's "how dare you?!" at the end was a really nice touch.
Haha Stossel’s editors are pretty damn good!
You have to respect Patrick for coming on to defend his side, regardless of whether he is right or wrong.
You forgot to run around screaming, "the sky is falling! the sky is falling!"
"Policing Information" That is what we call Tyranny, Authoritarianism, and a violation of the 1st Amendment.
Too bad dumb people think these corporations should be allowed to use communist practices. These corporations should be sued by everyone for controlling and manipulating all and any news and info.
@boneappleteeth, they are protected from accountability by section 230. It gives them immunity from legal consequences for what third parties say/write. It's a legal privilege other companies do not have. Facebook, TH-cam et al. should be regulated as common carriers or lose this legal privilege.
"All the climate scientists I know personally" - that's not a scientific statement. That's an anecdote. That's a reflection on him not the correctness of what he's saying.
You don't expect scientific statements from scientists any more, do you? Hasn't COVID taught you how this works now?
Wish we had more people with your kind of discernment. Good statement.
@@smking100 they are activists hiding behind their profession.
Jane Fonda has stated that she is a climate scientist, and she knows everything there is to know. Why is she not on that panel?
@@peterrhodes5663 well little angry /sad girl is our only hope, Jane Fonda? How dare you
There are so many of us that came up with Stossel's reporting, this feels profound and significant. To see a fatherly figure exposed to and becoming aware of what's going on out there.
Finally, I understand that it is tone that triggers these "activists". All this time they told me it was science and fact they relied on. Now its tone.
Censorship is wrong, even when they call it "policing," this is America,
"Toe the narrative, or you'll be shut up." - Climate Feedback.
I dare anyone to look up plant stomata and CO2 levels. I dare anyone to look up tree stumps under glaciers. I dare anyone to look up Hannibal crossing the Alps when it is not possible today due to glaciers. We have been lied to.
@@TheLittlered1961 wait what’s this implying or leading to?
@@harrisong5023 It implies that the CO2 levels have been as high as 350ppm 4 times in the last 1200 years. It implies that we have been warmer 1000, 2000, 3000, 7000 years ago than today. It implies that Mann and the other "climate scientists" have lied when they say we are warmer now than in the last 120 centuries. It implies that the 270ppm of CO2 prior to the industrial revolution is a lie.
Toe, as in your foot
Heresy in the church of climate is scourged.
Fight back!!! Keep telling the truth! Thank you a John ❤️
John Stossel is perhaps the best investigative journalist I’ve ever seen. The fact that he researches and then goes after his opponents in a civilized manner illustrates true journalism that is a dead art today. I mean that guy got destroyed up there and basically admitted he was wrong without screaming and yelling. John is without a doubt the best journalist in the country if not world.
If someone asks you if they should have children because they're scared of climate change, the answer is no, no you shouldn't.
Plenty of people ought not reproduce.......but the climate has nothing to do with it.
@@1VaDude granted but if they are questioning reproduction based on climate fear, it's a dead giveaway.
Oh, so true. I didn't look at it that way but that's so true.
Fear of climate change is another factor of natural selection to keep the cowardly and mentally inferior from reproducing.
If you dont want to have children, that is fine. But if someone refuses to have children because of climate change fear. Honestly (I'm going to sound like an a-hole) it might be for the best for those people to not reproduce.
He actually asked "how do we police information". Does he realize that this is the polar opposite of free speech? If he is against free speech, he is of a totaltarian mindset.
The arrogance to believe that I am incapable of taking in information from all sources and making a decision for myself is truely appalling. Do they realize how arrogant and condescending they are?
I would argue that ”Policing speech” is a mainstream stance now, which is purposefully framed the way it is framed, to avoid backlash as being authoritarian censorship (which it is). People always talk about learning from the past/history but collectively those lessons are lost in a few generations because of ignorance, cultural decay and bad faith actors.
I love how John Stossel always points out the obvious.. it's awesome!
Today's journalists could learn a lot from him.
Thank you Mr Stossel for your efforts ! Don't ever stop. We need you.
According to Dr. Fauxi the "science" evolves when it comes to COVID
But when it comes to climate change the science is settled. That should tell you everything.
Thank God the earth is still flat, we have the van allen belt going around it, cocaine is good for you in soda, heroin is good for childrens cough syrup, mercury is good in al kinds of medicines..... because science is settled and never questioned
This argument is invalid. We have thousands of years of data on climate change. We have just over a year on covid.
Remember when the science was settled on covid? I remember, and the kid born 3 months ago remembers, too!
that's a great point. It's all ridiculous. Science is a method, not a declaration.
@@tedubadu2536 Not true - satellite data is relatively new and so is the climate science which depends on it. Aside from the fact that climate science is incredibly complex with a multitude of poorly understood variables, and, as such, is very highly contested.
"I don't know what the answer is to policing information." He seems like a decent guy but did he hear what he just said? Policing information is the very definition of censorship.
The answer is simple: don't.
It is dangerous to have anyone police information, but it is also dangerous to have misinformation run wild. There's no good solution.
@@Jordan-cd3ce The solution is to debunk that misinformation, not censor it.
@@Jordan-cd3ce fight bad ideas with better ones. Fight falsehoods and misinformation with truth and actual facts
@@protox4 You can't debunk misinformation with more misinformation.
When i was a kid, I was told by my teachers that New York was going to be under water by 2020. Well.... 35 years later, it's still on the same side of sea level.
Give him credit for having the balls to agree to speak with Stossel!
Mad respect for the guy who did the interview. If we have more people who are willing to speak what they think instead of hiding behind a screen, this world would be so much better.
@marvelous LIE congrats. Have fun dealing with this constantly more polarizing America you're helping to create by being so dense & stubborn.
He's probably blacklisted by his peers in academia now...
Modern "Scientists": We need to police information!
Actual Scientists: Come at me with your best shot, let's see if I'm actually wrong!
More like:
Actual Scientists: "Come at me, bro!"
This. That's what science is lol. It's never "settled". The search for knowledge is never-ending.
modern scientists are not scientists, but in name only. They are government employees (or whoever pays their grants for "research")
Exactly. Failure is always an option to a true scientist. Being proven wrong only upsets the ego of the scientist, not the scientific enterprise.
@@SeraphsWitness hence, scientists aren't supposed to have egos. Well, not about their results. They can be prideful about how well they researched and came up with a novel idea or application based on the research. But, they shouldn't be married to a hypothesis that isn't supported by the research or is at least in dispute.
Using a start date of around 1980 skews that curve. Try using a start date of 1900 and you get a very different graph.
Bravo John Stossel.
Share Share Share !
"Omission of contextual information" -- sounds Orwellian to me.
Omitting important contextual information is a half truth. On the other hand he didn't say what was ommited. That itself is flawed logic.
It is. "Technically what you said is factually correct but there's more to it" is what someone says when they don't want to dispute outright facts but they have an agenda that is not served by those facts. Context can be important but if someone is factually correct, you can't censor them over context lol
@Professional shit poster The can claim that but they have to support their claim. If the support is the whole study is needed then he can counter that claim.
Not so Orwellian to all but more like lying thru omission.
"I don't know what the solution is with regard to policing information"
SIMPLE: YOU DON'T DO IT.
Exactly my reaction
Absolutely right. Cease the censorship. If I want to fact check comments made in a video, then I should be free to do it. But not hearing the comments due to someone's censorship is just plain wrong.
Yes…let the chips fall where they may. Let people be adults and figure things out for themselves.
Socialism now that sounds good.
There's more hate on the internet than ever before, because now, people know that if they are hateful enough actions will be taken against that person. It's disgusting, a real shame. I would love if a bunch of these social media people go to prison for violating freedom of speech.
Patrick Brown and John are heros. For speaking Truth.
During college for my degree in journalism that I’ve not used to this day, my professors showed us all sorts of different, mostly liberal, journalists as to say that they were the epitome of objective journalism. Stossel was the one that I saw actual objectivity in. He’s a legend...
Seems there's some inequality in the "fact-checking".
Straight up biased.
There has been for quite a while.
Snopes is a reputable Fact Checker. 🤣🤣🤣🤣.
Ya think?
No there isn't. The ministry of truth never lies, it's in the name.
respect to the one guy who agreed to be interviewed.
Its time to use Rumble and other social platforms and DUMP TH-cam. Censorship is not what we need, open debate is what we need.
God bless you.
Mr Stossel
Stossel is a gem. A true journalist. Keep up the great work!
No, he’s paid and biased too.
@@edmundf.kuelliiispiritualn2963 if you think in the modern world you're going to find anyone who isn't at the very least a little biased you are ignorant.
Always going all HAM on the B.S.
last one of the real journalist still free. Julian Assange is locked up
@@edmundf.kuelliiispiritualn2963
I actually find Stossel more middle of the road. He basically presents rational thought about certain issues. Something that most far left people can't even begin to understand.
What I like about John Stossel is he gives us facts with backup and that to me is journalism. Thank you
Facts?! Like his20/20 "investigation" on global warming that was so bad that producers QUIT. Yes the environment is cleaner these days. But that because of ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS.
He was FIRED from 20/20. He is a PROPAGANDIST not a journalist.
Gotta love it when you use the facts against them and their feelings are hurt. Because now they can't rally their protest because the facts stand tall.
John, you have been an outstanding journalist and still are!
That guy is brave for coming to the interview.
Cool that the dude agreed to the interview
For what it's worth, yeah it nice
@@buckman5510
I mean most of em dont even wanna talk
They love silencing other opinions!
These people are so corrupt
There needs to be recourse against "fact checkers." Being sued into oblivion would make them think twice about being political activists.
They just need to do away with "fact checkers". Facebook only implemented this to openly censor opposing views but disguised it as "fact checking".
"No man is more hated than he who speaks the truth."
If sea level rises 200 ft within the next 1000 years, then I am Kevin Costner from Water World! I remember falling for Al Gore's claims. And I am still waiting for his predictions to come true a decade later!
"HOW DARE YOU!" -- it gets me every time. ROFL.
"I don't know what the solution is when it comes to policing information" --- how about NOT policing information
“There’s only one thing I love other than see the stealing others’ ideas.”
“And that’s stealing freedom of speech.”
- Mark Zuckerberg, probably
I heard him say that. Probably.
China probably said “no, stealing ideas is still the best”
Facebook is not bound by the First Amendment. That said, since Facebook edits what it publishes, Facebook is not eligible for article 230 protection.
"I like having some sort of system that lets me know if information is true or false."
We used to call that the Bible.
@@mariokarter13 in 1600 maybe
Worried about what might happen 1000 years from now!