Pathetic and disgusting behavior by @ctvnews-rss.bsky.social. Legacy media leans so hard on their "journalistic integrity" in comparison to streamers and content creators, but when the chips are down, they fold like a cheap napkin.
Absolutely shameful that CTV caved to a disingenuous right-wing pressure campaign instead of standing their ground. It presents even more red flags about the state of the media in Canada.
@rachelgilmore.bsky.social did not deserve to be treated this way.
NEW: A searing editorial in the The Kyiv Independent.
“It’s time to say it plainly. America’s leadership has switched sides in the war. The American people have not, and they should speak up.
“A president just disrespected America in the Oval Office. It wasn’t Zelensky.”
@kyivindependent.com
Remember the good old days when the right wing nut jobs pretended that fascists and nazis weren't welcome at the convoy protests?
Now they openly celebrate America's decline into fascism and hope to be a part of it.
As promised, here are the slides I shared with students to convince them to NOT use chatGPT and other artificial stupidity.
TL;DR? AI is evil, unsustainable and stupid, and I'd much rather they use their own brains, make their own mistakes, and actually learn something. 🪄
A map of the Gulf of Mexico and instructions for sending feedback to Google reporting inaccurate content.
Trump is testing the tolerance for authoritarianism.
Do not obey in advance; encourage others to do the same, especially those with the power and privilege of Google.
The farmers who are out tens or hundreds of thousands after Elon reneged on funding contracts don't seem too happy.
Trump was only supposed to hurt people they don't like.
I think maybe areas close to the border understand the close ties between our countries, and see Trump's actions as a lack of respect. "Canada will never trust us again - he's wrecked that relationship" is something I heard more than once. Most farmers are decent to a fault - Trump is the opposite.
I spent today at a farm conference in Western NY state. Expected to hear lots of support for Trump.
Instead, in the first hour, had two farmers ask about moving to Canada.
Heard nothing all day but sadness and worry about what he's doing to the fed gov't and int'l relations.
He's burning the books now.
We all get that that's what's happening as web pages go dark, right?
Go sign this now.
Nuf said.
And yet when I, a credentialed expert in agriculture, tried to engage you regarding misinformation you've published regarding food and farming, the response was crickets.
So what gives?
The challenge is to overcome the disinformation by addressing what makes it "feel" true/desirable rather than treating it like an information deficit.
Telling disinformed voters that they're wrong/stupid plays right into the populist appeal of the Cons/PPC.
This is kind of about the LA fires but really about so much more. Definitely worth the watch.
Please consider supporting @rachelgilmore.bsky.social too - my resolution for 2025 is to invest in independent media: we've seen where expecting news for free leads us. open.substack.com/pub/rachelgi...
Mr Angus is the only person of substance saying what needs to be said to Trump and his odious ilk.
More, much more, of this please.
My editorial piece in @nationalobserver.com
We are not in ordinary times. We are in Trump times. The clock is ticking down on the arrival of the chaos machine in Washington. Canada is staring down a political tsunami but we're too busy to notice."
www.nationalobserver.com/2024/12/27/o...
OK, I guess I know too many excellent scicommers who refuse to work with GLP due to their extreme bias, ethical breaches, and bigotry.
And some of the worst status quo warriors who regularly feature there for the same reasons.
They may aggregate some decent content, but I can't ignore the rest.
By primary sources, I'm not referring to scientific publications, just media outlets that pay their writers and respect the integrity of their work. It's not a high bar.
Also, if by "that person sucks," you're referring to Jon, he's the founder and Executive Director of GLP.
Speaking as a former writer for GLP, it's hugely problematic. Whenever possible, I avoid them & find the original source. Along with routinely scraping and editing content without proper attribution, often misrepresenting the original context/intention, there's the racism: bsky.app/profile/jenn...
available to both organic and conventional growers (she also neglects to mention that conventional growers still use copper products too). Again, her claims lack accuracy and omit crucial context, as other experts in the field have also pointed out. bsky.app/profile/wyow...
Toxicity is determined by both number/rate of application and persistence. Copper needs to be applied more often because it breaks down more quickly. That breakdown means it poses basically no risk to consumers (another fact she conveniently omits). However, there are now better biofungicide options
And here she clearly implies that there is a two-tier approach to regulation. Check out the EPA Pesticide Registration website she links to - it's a totally false claim. Anyone familiar with pesticide use and regulation would recognize it as complete nonsense.
Yes. "Organic pesticides" is a misnomer - the EPA and PDP make no such distinction (there are synthetic pesticides approved for organic use - another factual error). Inclusion in the PDP is a risk-based assessment - claiming that they "exclude organic pesticides" is conspiracy-theory level thinking.
The copper sulfate she references is a algaecide, not a fungicide (like mancozeb). She's cherry-picking data and making faulty comparisons, as explained in the article I linked:
How looking at my info and looking at her sources before continuing to argue with me then?
You keep saying, "she provides sources." But she doesn't have any sources linked to support the claims I disputed. If you see otherwise, please share them here.
Not demanding anything? This was you yesterday, wasn't it? bsky.app/profile/dale...
The original claims were hers, and I disputed them - the burden is hers, and you claimed she had sources. I pointed out the lack of sources, and provided further support for my concerns. You're somehow still saying she's right and I'm wrong based on the volume of content she creates?
I may have time to answer any other specifics later, but allow me to point out the confirmation bias at play here: you're demanding that an expert in the field disprove (with a higher degree of evidentiary support) claims originally made by someone with no expertise (but a larger platform/influence)
With regard to her claims about "two-tier" regulation and oversight at the EPA, she did link to the EPA site, so please go there (or anywhere) and show me any reference to how a pesticide for organic use is evaluated for registration and use any differently: www.epa.gov/pesticide-re...
I also went back to Dr. Love's article, and found zero sources to support the claims I've corrected. Her claims are mostly recycled from an old SciAm blog post that is debunked in the article(s) I linked here. bsky.app/profile/rwal...
