And I don't mean an article, I mean something that has been peer reviewed

airplanes are much worse than driving

obviously that data came from a peer reviewed study haha

Oh man

Not necessarily though.

journalists dont come up with their own data, but they do manipulate other people's studies to show things they want to show

nah bogus climate claims are perpetuated based on something journalists read on twitter

Just look at the amazon fire fiasco

ehhh actually no, they can pretty much come up with stuff

they CAN but they generally dont

not saying that was necessarily the case here, but just something to consider

Honestly they generally do, most journalistic organizations don't even issue retractions when they're straight up wrong

the fires were the same under lula and roussef but no one said shit

I mean I could come up with 3 or 4 examples off the top of my head

That is true, especially in recent years a number of journals has been extremely shotty

man if you really think journalists "generally make stats up on the spot" i feel like you're in fairytale conspiracy land...

and i have nothing wrong with conspiracies

News papers ignoring the firing of rubber bullets into the eyes and throats of yellow vesters being an international example

just a subset of them are very much fairytales

yea but thats omission dude

its not "making stats up"

lie by omission

Covington and Amazonian Forest Fires being another 2

Hmm

Whats a fourth, I may have to actually think about that one for a second

journalist manipulation is rarely about making up statistics, its usually lie by omission or citing dodgy sources

Gender Neutral Santa Clause

"russiagate"

OH YEAH

Russiagate

Hmm

brother i dont follow mainstream media because of things like that

Pizzagate too

but that doesnt mean statistics are made up generally

We aren't saying that they're generally made up, just that it's an entirely plausible possibility

I read an article doomsaying climate disaster by 2023 which didn't even cite a source

soup said they generally make up stats

Another one that actually used a study performed by somebody without a degree or employer who constructed a faulty model from incomplete climate data

*well I'm saying that at least

ye

I'm not saying they "generally make up stats" I'm saying that you can't rely on them to use stats