1
11

[–] 3999193? 1 points 11 points (+12|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I've sorted by /new there, and by and large, everything that seemed like spam, pseudoscience, or just a news article with a clickbait-sounding title (everyone has their first experience with clickbait, and promptly learns how to avoid it), was downvoted to the point of it being at or below 0 SCP.

I will say this about @teh_sauce_guy : He was looking over a very healthy community of Voaters dedicated to science. The fact that the subverse hasn't gone the spam-filled way of the subverses with inactive moderators like /v/america, and the heavy downvoting that mathgrunt's "psuedoscience" posts got, are testaments to that.

1
4

[–] flyawayhigh [S] 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I think teh_sauce_guy may have been a bit heavy handed compared to my liking. There's room for disageement. I think he got swept up by MathGrunt's actions. MathGrunt really didn't belong -- he was a tyrant.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] flyawayhigh [S] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

It looks even better there than I expected. I think there should be moderators in v/science, but we don't need people running it who believe they are the truth police or anti-bias enforcers. :)

0
2

[–] redditor1255 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

A few years ago the global warming proponents over at the UN published their raw temperature data. I ran it through some software I developed and found some things that really call into question the validity of their results. The biggest problem was the holes in the data. Huge sections of the Earth are dominated by small and inconsistent data collecting sites. Data from before the 80's was pretty sketch all together.

If someone can remember the name of the organization, or better yet link me to the data itself, I'll be happy to do it again.

It should be in a grib2 format. My software reads the data, makes some pretty pictures, and provides some basic statistics.

2
0

[–] mamwad 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago  (edited ago)

Now that the moderation problem has been solved, the admins should analyze the voting records for the global warming denial posts. The oil industry is known to shill and wouldn't have any trouble using sockpuppets to game /v/science.

0
4

[–] flyawayhigh [S] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

While I entirely feel your concern, it doesn't look very suspicious to me at this point. It seems somewhat in line with lots of the positions taken around here. The sock puppets will be here in force soon though, I'm sure. :)

[–] [deleted] 4 points -1 points (+3|-4) ago 

[Deleted]

1
7

[–] flyawayhigh [S] 1 points 7 points (+8|-1) ago  (edited ago)

The purpose of this post was to support free speech at Voat, not to debate global warming.

I used global warming as an illustration of the concept. You may agree or disagree, but I hope you understand the concept presented. We have free speech. That's what matters. :)

2
2

[–] xeemee 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

yes, i'm aware of the propose of the sub and i apologize for my post, which i since deleted

it just drives me up a wall when people think there is a "consensus" between "scientists", some of which are purported to be scientists but are not, that there is an undeniable link between human co2 and climate warming

[–] [deleted] 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

2
3

[–] Teh_Sauce_Guy 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

So basically lets keep polluting because polluted air is totally harmless and CO2 is not toxic at all.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

[Deleted]