> In general, I think I understand where the criticism is coming from. Every time I post on social media about being deplatformed, banned, or silenced, someone chimes in with their own story about being banned because “big government is trying to suppress the fact that echinacea cures Covid” or whatever. Spoiler, echinacea doesn’t cure Covid, but this is the kind of crazy nonsense my work is compared to. Are you a credential person? Great, I’m a scientist with a PhD from one of the top universities in the world. I’ve worked at NASA. I’ve published a number of papers.
I couldn't care less for this shit. "Yes I understand the necessity of censorship. But not me. I've worked at NASA. I've published 'a number of papers.'" Lol.
> The problem isn’t my thoroughly detailed research, which I would love to have critiqued in good faith. The problem is big tech companies making billions of dollars aren’t capable of doing basic analysis of scientific work, or hiring a team that can, which is why the best they’re capable of on the pandemic front, for example, is attaching a link to the CDC website on every post that mentions “Covid” or “vaccine.”
Indeed. They are not capable of doing basic analysis of every video, or hiring a team that can. Billions of dollars aren't enough to hire a team to analyze every video on youtube.
>I couldn't care less for this shit. "Yes I understand the necessity of censorship. But not me. I've worked at NASA. I've published 'a number of papers.'" Lol.
There are situations where you have someone who truly has deep merit meeting someone who believes they do and who and tries to relate to the former, but is so far disconnected that they have categorically different experience which immediately disqualifies the latter, but the general public would be unable to recognize, yet it would take significant effort for the former to explain the situation to an extent the public could understand, and at risk to the emotions and ego of the latter. Surely you can relate to this situation to some extent?
Unfortunately, the "echinacea cures Covid" claim probably isn't true, but the CDC and YouTube people seem to have decided that ANY claims about therapeutics must be suppressed. There isn't any objective reason for this; it's purely political side-taking.
As for your research: are you saying there are no forums where your work can be "critiqued in good faith"? Or just that YouTube isn't that forum? Because you're right -- it isn't.
I couldn't care less for this shit. "Yes I understand the necessity of censorship. But not me. I've worked at NASA. I've published 'a number of papers.'" Lol.
> The problem isn’t my thoroughly detailed research, which I would love to have critiqued in good faith. The problem is big tech companies making billions of dollars aren’t capable of doing basic analysis of scientific work, or hiring a team that can, which is why the best they’re capable of on the pandemic front, for example, is attaching a link to the CDC website on every post that mentions “Covid” or “vaccine.”
Indeed. They are not capable of doing basic analysis of every video, or hiring a team that can. Billions of dollars aren't enough to hire a team to analyze every video on youtube.