Twitter Users Rip Jordan Peterson a New One

Dixie Cup

House Member
Sep 16, 2006
4,850
2,884
113
Edmonton

Thankfully, there are those of us who support Peterson which simply shows how out of touch the Associations regarding medical personnel have become. Not just for Peterson, but for Medical physicians who aren't allowed to speak freely. This country is doomed if we continue down this path as no one will believe or trust anything being said because of the corruption involved in government & associations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: petros

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
25,340
5,958
113
B.C.

Thankfully, there are those of us who support Peterson which simply shows how out of touch the Associations regarding medical personnel have become. Not just for Peterson, but for Medical physicians who aren't allowed to speak freely. This country is doomed if we continue down this path as no one will believe or trust anything being said because of the corruption involved in government & associations.
Don’t worry even in Ottawa he sells out the Canadian Tire Center , many are hearing his message .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
103,595
8,236
113
Low Earth Orbit

Thankfully, there are those of us who support Peterson which simply shows how out of touch the Associations regarding medical personnel have become. Not just for Peterson, but for Medical physicians who aren't allowed to speak freely. This country is doomed if we continue down this path as no one will believe or trust anything being said because of the corruption involved in government & associations.
The only way to beat China is play their game?
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
7,440
1,491
113
New Brunswick

Thankfully, there are those of us who support Peterson which simply shows how out of touch the Associations regarding medical personnel have become. Not just for Peterson, but for Medical physicians who aren't allowed to speak freely. This country is doomed if we continue down this path as no one will believe or trust anything being said because of the corruption involved in government & associations.

So, just curious; did you support scientists when Harper muzzled them? Demand Harper step back that policy?
 

The_Foxer

House Member
Aug 9, 2022
2,763
1,687
113
So, just curious; did you support scientists when Harper muzzled them? Demand Harper step back that policy?
Well that was a bit of a myth. Harper never muzzled scientists. They could pusblish their works, and of course they could speak on anyone else's published works. What they couldn't do is take gov't money, do research and then charge for a speaking tour making more money from talking about their research.

That's not actually muzzling. The research is out there and anyone can talk about it but you dont get to make money from the gov't and use that to make more money for yourself. You can make money talking about OTHER people's research.

It's pretty common that if you do something for a company or employer that they get to own that
 

The_Foxer

House Member
Aug 9, 2022
2,763
1,687
113
Uh huh.

It's okay to admit you're a hypocrite, Dix and not all that "unbiased" as you try to 'appear' to be.
ROFLMAO!!!! Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, this is pot... :LOL:

I guess if you have no argument then just blatantly lying to yourself is a suitable substutute for those on the left, eh Serry? :)
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
25,340
5,958
113
B.C.
Uh huh.

It's okay to admit you're a hypocrite, Dix and not all that "unbiased" as you try to 'appear' to be.
Explain how non disclosure agreements work ? Should government employ these ?
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
19,060
4,735
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
So, just curious; did you support scientists when Harper muzzled them? Demand Harper step back that policy?
Below is from the New York Times in 2017:

Starting in 2007, shortly after Mr. Harper became prime minister, new rules were issued that prevented federal scientists from speaking freely with the media about their research without clearing it with public relations specialists or having an administrative “minder” accompany the scientists on interviews or to scientific conferences. More often, the government would simply deny permission for a scientist to speak with reporters if that person’s findings ran counter to Mr. Harper’s political agenda. Inquiries from journalists became miredin an obstinate bureaucracy, and media coverage of government climate research dropped 80 percent after the rules were imposed.

Then this below is from the Toronto Sun:
OTTAWA -- If Stephen Harper muzzled federal government scientists, then Justin Trudeau has failed to lift the muzzle, a federal public sector union says in a memo obtained by Postmedia Network.

Mind you, data quietly tabled in the House of Commons earlier this summer suggests that Harper's "muzzle" appeared to be ineffective. That data shows that federal government scientists gave nearly 1,500 media interviews in the 12 months prior to last October's election.

So, on that note, it sure sounds like Stephen Harper DID muzzle Scientists to some extent, AS DID Justin Trudeau, and it seems to continue it to this day:
While it’s ironic, given Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s searing criticism of Stephen Harper for “muzzling scientists” during his years as Conservative prime minister, it’s just another example of how all governments eventually become the things they said they despised when they were first elected.

So it’s hardly surprising that a Sept. 2 column in the Canadian Medical Association Journal — first cited by Blacklock’s Reporter — says “Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) stalled media access to the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) at the same time Canada’s chief public health officer suspended regular pandemic briefings and interviews ‘in light of the election’.”

Over the past 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s become readily apparent that the Public Health Agency of Canada is a politicized arm of the Trudeau government. Rather than a fiercely independent public health body whose sole focus is on giving accurate and timely advice to Canadians on the pandemic and other public health issues, PHAC struggles not to offend its political masters.

While it’s ironic, given Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s searing criticism of Stephen Harper for “muzzling scientists” during his years as Conservative prime minister, etc…

During the 2015 election campaign that brought them to power, Trudeau and the Liberals said they despised government secrecy as the default position of the previous Stephen Harper regime and they would deliver “open and transparent government.”

Today, Trudeau refuses to release any details of the Liberal government’s controversial contracts with vaccine manufacturers that Canadians are paying billions for, contrary to a number of democratic countries which have released redacted versions of their contracts in the name of openness and transparency.

Anyway, sure sounds like Stephen Harper did to some extent muzzle scientist, as did Justin Trudeau to some extent, and does still. Oh well, follow the science.
 

The_Foxer

House Member
Aug 9, 2022
2,763
1,687
113
So, on that note, it sure sounds like Stephen Harper DID muzzle Scientists to some extent, AS DID Justin Trudeau, and it seems to continue it to this day:
You really can't call it 'muzzling'. THey could publish their research along with their conclusions and their data. they just weren't allowed to 'self promote' or discuss the work that they got paid to do with the media. That is entirely common in business - a lot of places say you can't discuss your work or information about your job publically. That has never been referred to as 'Muzzling' at any point in history.

AND - there was nothing to stop any scientist from commenting on your work publically at all. as noted here:

That data shows that federal government scientists gave nearly 1,500 media interviews in the 12 months prior to last October's election.

So the scientists were free to talk. They were not muzzled. They could discuss any research but they could not discuss their own that the gov't paid for without permission. That is not muzzling.

And the reason for this was simple - scientists were developing a bad habit of pushing for grants for research that would be popular and headline grabbing, because if they made a splash they tended to get even more grants from the college that issues most of the grants in Canada. So - now if they couldn't make a big deal out of their own research, it became far more important to do valuable research and make a splash in the scientific community. Because if all you did was something popular then OTHERS would get the air time talking about it.

So no muzzle. THey could talk, they could publish their works, they could publish their notes and conclusions. They could talk to the media about any research that was done other than their own. That is not muzzling.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
19,060
4,735
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
So we really can’t call what Trudeau is doing muzzling these scientists either then? They both are or they both aren’t and it sure looks like they both did and Trudeau still is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Serryah

The_Foxer

House Member
Aug 9, 2022
2,763
1,687
113
So we really can’t call what Trudeau is doing muzzling these scientists either then?
No, and i never have and the media stopped doing so as soon as it became trudeau who was doing it for the most part :)

It's entirely reasonable. As i noted many businesses make it a requirement not to discuss the work you've done publicly without permission. At least the scientists are not restricted from publishing their works publicly with their conclusions and findings and doing that in a very public fashion for all the world to see and for their collegues to discuss in public if they wish.

But peterson is a different story. He's not being asked to not discuss research he did on the job and got paid for. He's being told not to express a personal political opinion or they will attack his job and make him suffer for daring to speak out in a manner they don't like as a private individual. THAT would be muzzling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron in Regina