In another disturbing move toward restricting freedom of expression in Europe, a Facebook post about renowned MIT climate scientist Professor Richard Lindzen was censored within a minute. This development raises serious questions about the role of social media and the European Union in controlling information.
Scientific knowledge under attack
Professor Richard Lindzen, a respected climate researcher who worked at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) until his retirement, recently expressed his doubts about the common climate change narratives in Brussels at the invitation of the Hungarian think tank MCC. Lindzen argues that climate change is being used for propaganda and profits by globalists. These statements were published by the TKP platform and then shared by a reader on Facebook.
Lightning-fast censorship
Within just a minute, the posting was censored on Facebook. This raises the question of whether Meta, the company behind Facebook, is carrying out this censorship on its own initiative or whether it is acting under pressure from the European Union. It could also be that Professor Lindzen was declared persona non grata due to his critical stance on the EU’s climate policy or that the Hungarian think tank MCC is generally censored because Hungary’s policies are often viewed critically in the EU.
Scientific debate in a stranglehold
The censorship of scientifically based opinions is an alarming sign of the state of freedom of expression in the EU. Scientific discourse thrives on contradiction and falsification, as the philosopher Karl Popper put it. But the current practice of the EU and large tech companies seems to promote exactly the opposite: the suppression of inconvenient scientific findings.
The Digital Services Act and its consequences
These censorship measures are in line with the EU’s Digital Services Act, which is supposedly aimed at combating disinformation. However, critics argue that these regulations are increasingly being used to suppress dissent and enforce a unified, politically acceptable narrative.
A dangerous precedent
The rapid censorship of the posting about Professor Lindzen shows how fragile freedom of expression has become in the digital world. It is a dangerous precedent that shows how easily scientific and political opinions can be suppressed. This is not only an attack on freedom of expression, but also on scientific integrity.
Reactions and outlook
The reactions to this censorship measure are diverse. Many see this as evidence that the climate alarmists’ position is weak and can only be maintained by suppressing dissent. Others warn of the long-term consequences for democracy and academic freedom in Europe.
It remains to be seen how these developments will continue to unfold. However, one thing is clear: the censorship of scientific opinions and the restriction of freedom of expression are issues that affect us all and that urgently require a critical public debate.
