Reddit shadowbanned my comment about the Fine People Hoax.

157    27 Jun 2019 21:34 by u/jubelo

A post about immigration in /Murica came up and I had a decent conversation about it with some folks. One guy brought up the Fine People Hoax, which I replied with a transcript of Trump's comments on the matter. That reply is visible to me when logged in, but invisible when logged out. Here are some screenshots: https://imgur.com/VQYNYFw https://imgur.com/fnDl3N2 Since Scott Adams talks about being demonitized for mentioning this Hoax, I assume reddit is actively blocking the spreading of this information.

26 comments

42 u/Mozgus 27 Jun 2019 22:39
I literally can't store any more anti-trump hoax quotes in my brain at this point. I never wanted to defend orange man, but I listen and remember what presidents say. I feel like I must be one of the few who do. Its not hard when the news media today will outright misquote him 60 seconds after his speeches.
3 u/BrightsydeFred 28 Jun 2019 20:23
These fuckers are gonna get him reelected single handedly, I'm calling it
-1 u/macetero 28 Jun 2019 20:41
usually from watching his clips, the media quotes are accurate. at least from what I see on the media. can you give me a few examples of such attacks?
2 u/Mozgus 28 Jun 2019 21:23
Did op not give you one already? Just search for them. If you're saying they are accurate in that they will quote a fraction of a sentence out of context, especially when the prior or following sentence completely vindicates the quote, then we probably won't find anything to discuss here. For example, if you think trump sexually assaults women by grabbing by the pussy, wants to ban all Muslims, thinks all Mexicans are rapists and murderers, etc, then you have suffered the misquoting done by the fake news media. All you have to do is watch the uncut speeches. You won't LIKE the guy. I have always found him gross. I wouldn't shake his hand. But I'll still routinely correct people who claim he says things he has not said. And I sincerely don't want 4 more years of him, but he's going to get a lot of sympathy votes again. That's for sure.
1 u/macetero * 29 Jun 2019 06:19
Nah, I dont think much of anything objective of him. Im not north american and I dont follow this too closely, nor do I read about nitty-gritty political topics from you guys very often. I really just want to see some verifiable and straightforward examples of how exactly he is being misquoted so I can accurately judge.
32 u/liberules 27 Jun 2019 21:51
powermods have been able to shadowban individual comments for a long time now. go say anything in r-politics that merely asks questions about global warming... your comment will disappear. for example, ask them what's a fixed volume container's relative temp rise at the earth's surface when adding 100 PPM CO2 to one container, and leaving the other alone as control. none of them can answer this. not one. commenters might respond, but more likely, your comment will be shadowbanned within a few minutes.
13 u/nmodritrgsan 27 Jun 2019 23:16
> ask them what's a fixed volume container's relative temp rise at the earth's surface when adding 100 PPM CO2 to one container, and leaving the other alone as control To be perfectly honest, if you ask that using those words it sounds like you are taking the piss. Most of the time it is fine to dissident with popular opinion, but you need to be smart about it. You need to be fucking humble and concise in your speech.
5 u/liberules 28 Jun 2019 12:46
it's very exact speech. if you don't they say unrelated shit and then blame you for moving the goalposts when you specify.
1 u/ThatCoconut 29 Jun 2019 13:14
When you start discussing ice core samplings and the temperate zone we currently live in that scientist can't explain suggesting our climate is not the global norm nor will it remain as such you get silenced quickly. Accepted science Good. Questioning narrative Bad.
0 u/theaussiewhisperer 28 Jun 2019 10:39
But the co2 isn’t causing the rise in temp directly, the greenhouse effect is responsible due to co2 absorbing infrared radiation. Paper from 1876 was the first to quantity these effects on Venus https://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf
4 u/liberules 28 Jun 2019 10:42
woooosh... that's what the container is for... did you not take high school physics or chemistry? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRKz82v5JQY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRKz82v5JQY)
-1 u/theaussiewhisperer 28 Jun 2019 10:51
Was not aware you were taking the piss. You reckon reddit admins want an article similar to the t_d one saying they let global warming bullshit fly though?
4 u/liberules 28 Jun 2019 11:09
i was not taking the piss. you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
-5 u/theaussiewhisperer 28 Jun 2019 11:10
Hahaha dude the effect on carbon on the atmosphere temp is pretty well established. Fuck this sub is gold “What would happen to the temp of a container if we add co2” and “what happens to an atmosphere if we add more co2” are very different questions
2 u/liberules 28 Jun 2019 12:36
keep proving my point.
4 u/Endless_Summer 28 Jun 2019 15:15
You're right, it is pretty well established. You're just wrong about the effects. https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/5/4/76/htm
0 u/theaussiewhisperer 28 Jun 2019 21:43
In your paper: “Atmospheric CO2 and other trace gases emitted to the atmosphere by the combustion of fossil fuels and changes in land use patterns capture infrared energy radiated from the Earth’s surface, warming the atmosphere and surface by the “greenhouse” effect.” What are you disputing here cunt pull your head in
15 u/AjayiMVP 27 Jun 2019 22:16
Fuck Muhammad in his gay ass.
6 u/Art-Vandelay13 27 Jun 2019 23:32
it could possibly be automod flagging your comment for link spam. to check if you're shadow-banned go to your user profile page, and log out - if you still see your user profile, you're not shadow-banned, if you get a 404 you are.
1 u/ThatCoconut 29 Jun 2019 13:23
Using automod and the wiki, subreddits can shadowban selected users. Admins can do it site wide. There are several web sites and subreddits that check for removed comments..... r/commentremovalchecker
1 u/sneakpeekbot 29 Jun 2019 13:24
Here's a sneak peek of /r/CommentRemovalChecker using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/CommentRemovalChecker/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [Help us expose social media bias and censorship! With your help, we can investigate not only Reddit, but also Twitter and Facebook](https://www.patreon.com/blessbots) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CommentRemovalChecker/comments/blzaqd/help_us_expose_social_media_bias_and_censorship/) \#2: [\[HOW TO USE\] What is this??!](https://np.reddit.com/r/CommentRemovalChecker/comments/9u0zes/how_to_use_what_is_this/) \#3: ["Leaderboard": Users with the most removed comments/submissions](https://np.reddit.com/r/CommentRemovalChecker/wiki/index) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/CommentRemovalChecker/comments/a9bxjp/leaderboard_users_with_the_most_removed/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/afd0dd/blacklist/)
3 u/plsgokys 28 Jun 2019 09:18
They probably have to review your comment because of the link before it gets posted. However, would you mind sharing the link to your comment?
5 u/jubelo [OP] 28 Jun 2019 13:22
https://reddit.com/r/MURICA/comments/c5rs4a/_/es5adyq/?context=1 Im curious if this comes up for you or anyone.
3 u/plsgokys 28 Jun 2019 13:52
https://snew.notabug.io/r/MURICA/comments/c5rs4a/_/es5adyq/?context=1
3 u/jubelo [OP] 28 Jun 2019 14:37
Censored within one second. What are they so afraid of?
2 u/[deleted] * 28 Jun 2019 19:46
[deleted]