Michael Schellenberger

Rank 39 of 47
|
Score -94
3/17/2025, 12:40:43 AM
X
In reply to:
Pacheco the Ghost
@PMtalking
·
323d
@shellenberger In the same story today, the NYT still defiantly attacks the skeptics who correctly pointed out the source of the virus. They told the truth but for cynical reasons, scientists lied, but for noble reasons.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
323d
Any cuts to US government funding of medical research will kill millions, say the media. But cuts to US government spending on coronavirus research would have saved millions, as they now finally admit. Why can't they see the contradiction? Because Orange Man/Rocket Man Bad.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
324d
The former head of the UK's foreign intelligence agency, MI6, told Boris Johnson in early 2020 that the Covid virus escaped from the Wuhan lab. That means that the US, UK, Chinese, & German governments all knew the truth, covered it up, and spread disinformation. Case closed.

The statement criticizes a perceived disrespect towards online sleuths who contributed to uncovering information about a crime and cover-up. It implies that their efforts were undervalued or dismissed, which can be seen as a defense of citizen journalism and grassroots investigation.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to highlight the efforts of online sleuths, suggesting their work was significant and should be respected, aligning with the principle of doing no harm by advocating for recognition. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    By defending the online sleuths, the statement respects their dignity and contributions, aligning with the principle of respecting privacy and dignity. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding and empathy towards the online sleuths, aligning with the principle of promoting empathy and compassion. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement could be seen as engaging in constructive criticism by pointing out perceived disrespect, but it uses strong language ('gross and insulting'), which might detract from constructive dialogue. [-1]