LinkedIn has finally "explained" why they took down my popular video criticizing COP 26: "false claims of denying climate change due to the use of fossil fuels."

But my video contains no such claims, and in fact contains two *affirmations* by me of manmade climate change!
Last week LinkedIn took down, without explanation, this popular video of mine criticizing COP 26. The video had 11,000 views when they took it down, and was spreading rapidly.
Here's the transcript of my video criticizing COP 26. At no point do I deny "climate change due to the use of fossil fuels." At 2 points I affirm it--as acknowledged by the host: "AS YOU RECOGNIZE YOURSELF, HUMANS DO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE CLIMATE."…
Please reach out to @LinkedIn, including founder @reidhoffman, parent company @Microsoft, Microsoft CEO @satyanadella, and Microsoft founder @BillGates, and tell them to reverse not only this decision but to investigate and reform their content suppression policies.
If @LinkedIn, @reidhoffman, @Microsoft, @satyanadella, and @BillGates support the removal of content, not for misrepresentations of climate science but for *challenging climate policy*, then LinkedIn is now an anti-intellectual, political entity and should be condemned as such.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexEpstein

17 Nov
*Corporate Energy Liar exposed*

Budweiser claims its beers are "100% renewable." In fact, most of the energy that goes into its beer is fossil fuel.

Learn how @budweiserusa is lying about its energy use and why that's so damaging--then join me in calling for a public apology.👇 Image
Today's Budweiser cans and Budweiser ads are plastered with logos saying "100% renewable electricity"--leading customers to think that if they drink Budweiser they are not using any fossil fuel.

But in reality *most of the energy that goes into a Bud is fossil fuel*. Image
When you drink a Budweiser beer you are indirectly using energy in many ways: mining for aluminum, manufacturing cans, farming hops, brewing beer, transporting beer, and refrigeration. Most of this energy comes from fossil fuels.

How can Bud claim "100% renewable"? Deception.
Read 17 tweets
12 Nov
This taxonomy of "woke religion" by @peterboghossian and
@ShellenbergerMD is fascinating.

Question: What's the essence of "woke"?

My working answers:
* anti-achievement
* anti-value

There's always some achievement/value "woke" is trying to destroy.🧵
In the case of climate change/catastrophism, the achievement of industrial civilization, which has made human life incomparably better--including far safer from climate--is the object of "woke" hatred and attempts at destruction. The hatred/destruction includes nuclear and hydro.
In the case of racism, "woke" claims to be focused on racial discrimination but its actual focus is on denigrating myriad achievements--America's success, individuals' career success, even mathematics--as "racist." (What could be more racist than calling math/logic "white"?)
Read 8 tweets
11 Nov
Here we go...LinkedIn has, without explanation, taken down my popular evisceration of COP 26. The last time they took down a post of mine they ended up reinstating it and apologizing...

Help fight suppression of the truth by continuing to share the Twitter version of this video.
Here's what happened the last time LinkedIn took down a post of mine...they were obviously wrong, and to their credit, reinstated the post and apologized. But it took a lot of public attention to get there.

@reidhoffman want to help expedite the process?…
As I said in the video that LinkedIn is currently suppressing, if platforms are doing fact-checking they shouldn't be trying to fact-check me--I have the best research team in the world on these issues--they should be trying to hire me and my team.
Read 4 tweets
11 Nov
Before and during COP 26, I have claimed that it is not a scientific conference but a pseudoscientific, anti-human conference that is pursuing mass-genocide.

The COP 26 Agreement has proven me right. Here are the top 5 reasons the Agreement is pseudoscientific and anti-human.
Reason 1 the COP 26 Agreement is pseudoscientific and anti-human: It calls for the rapid elimination of fossil fuels—the source of 80% of the world’s energy—without addressing the *cost* of doing so. In fact, the word “cost” is not mentioned once in the Agreement!
Reason 2 the COP 26 Agreement is pseudoscientific and anti-human: It totally ignores the benefits of low-cost, reliable energy in general and fossil fuels in particular. The word “energy” is not mentioned once, even though COP 26 is trying to eliminate 80% of the world’s energy!
Read 7 tweets
10 Nov
John Kerry casually mentioned in a COP 26 interview that the US won't be using any coal by 2030.

What an ignorant and presumptuous wannabe dictator he is.

In the last several years, reliable, *resilient* coal has bailed out solar, wind, and even natural gas many times.

This past winter, reliable, resilient coal bailed out solar/wind (which largely disappear when it's very cold) as well as natural gas (which is more vulnerable than coal to supply disruptions) in many states including OK--see this quote from @GovStitt.
The disastrous TX blackouts should have taught us that we need power plants that are 1) reliable and 2) resilient. Reliable means: they can produce as much power as we need, when we need it. Resilient means: they can keep producing power even under adverse conditions.
Read 8 tweets
9 Nov
Since the global media have no interest in publicizing the pro-energy activists in poor countries who are challenging COP 26, I will. Here are some comments by @nj_ayuk, head of the Africa Energy Chamber, who points out that "600 million Africans have no lights."

"I respect China and Russia who aren’t attending #COP26. They’ve no intention of playing games and will drive up their energy industry while the West impoverishes their citizens through radical action."
--African energy leader @nj_ayuk
"Ironically not attending is better for the planet than the hypocrites arriving by private jets and burning a few million litres of rocket fuel through the atmosphere every 5 minutes to show off to their friends and lecturing Africans to go green immediately..."
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!