@Carl As a left-handed person I approve of left biases

Though just to be clear, referring to left-biased sources from fact checkers without political axes to grind or with understanding scientific inquire [sic] would be OK? Or is that list inclusive? E.g. meeting one or the other criterion is fine but both is the scenario that is problematic?

Or did you just throw that last part in because your concerns are, themselves, politically biased in the opposite direction?

Where I can find full list of updates of CoC?

Ooh, what I missed out!

@TylerH Scientific inquiry attempts to falsify hypotheses. For example, it would attempt to falsify the assumptions associated with the forbidden topics of discussion including climate change, gender, mRNA inoculation, masking, and lockdowns.

Science is indeed the opposite of dialectic materialism, and has been identified as an anathema whenever a discordance arises. For example, it was forbidden to study or speak of Skinner's experiments in the Soviet Block. That does not make science 'right wing.' But it does outline the edges of the leftist information bubble that the other half of humanity has to put up with.

That sounds like what I call pseudo-profound BS. That being said, Stack Exchange is not a body dedicated to scientific inquiry; it's a private business entity whose goal is to make money and whose mission is to provide a high-quality Q&A resource to the public. Scientific rigor or political bias is not really relevant or a concern of the Code of Conduct beyond what the company prefers to instill in it.

As for the political leanings of science, it's absolutely the opposite (at least in modern times); left-leaning organizations tend to be far more accepting of mainstream science than right-leaning organizations. At least, that's the case in the US, where the company is based, and through whose lens one should view any stance or position that the network has to abide by.

@TylerH There are sites within Stack Exchange that are wholly dedicated to science. However, Stack Exchange is now a political activist organization that has the ultimate audacity to institute a 'misinformation' policy presumably dedicated to removing any non-approved scientific opinion.

@Carl Stack Exchange has been a "political activist" organization for years

Also, it's their network; they get to decide what misinformation is in terms of their network. That's... generally how things work: you get to set the rules for your own playground

But having read the new CoC, I don't recall seeing anything about science, one way or the other

or misinformation for that matter

@TylerH My post in which a presented a smidgen of climate change dialog was just removed which caused me to lose 20 points from those who agreed with it. So, is climate change political or not? Only one laughably incorrect opinion is allowed on this site, or so it would seem.

Can you share a screenshot, or a link if it's on SO or SE (which I doubt, given the subject)?

I doubt it was deleted due to violating the code of conduct, unless you've left out some salient details

@tylerH meta.stackexchange.com/a/389328/341152 It is germane, and it was part of my reaction to 'misinformation' policy.

It doesn't have to be a violation of code of conduct to be deleted, and no reason was given so speculation is moot. However, staff, a moderator and another person did that, so you can ask them. I doubt they will respond.

It looks like your post was deleted because, if I had to guess (I haven't read it thoroughly but don't think I need to), for being a wildly rambling diatribe that spends most of its time talking about totally unrelated things to the question it is posted as an answer to. It's at once rude, of no substantive contribution, and not an answer to the question that was asked. I don't see any relation to the code of conduct here or any issue in general with deleting it.

@TylerH I was trying to present facts to illustrate what misinformation excludes. And that was excluded. Small wonder.

I have to decide whether to contribute anything further to this site, it does not seem to be a level enough playing field to bother with. A shame really, it had so much potential.

@Carl I mean, how exactly does the deuterium concentration on Mars relate to the Code of Conduct for a Q&A site on Earth?

@TylerH Evidence that atmospheric loss is a real thing, and any discussion of Earth climate should be mindful of such, and the meaning of any climate changes should indeed be cognizant of the low temperature and low CO2 we are currently experiencing.

That misinformation is now a criterion, and that only the climate catastrophe hypothesis is acceptable as the contrary has been labeled 'misinformation,' implies that only garbage science is now permitted on this site.

@Carl OK, but this isn't a question about climate change or atmosphere loss. It's a question about the Code of Conduct

Meta Stack Exchange is a network-wide site to discuss the policies and behaviors of the network at large. Even on the Earth Science Meta site, that answer would be... questionable at best.

Some sites exist to address misinformation about specific topics, such as climate change misinformation. DeSmog, formerly The DeSmogBlog, publishes factually accurate information in order to counter the well-funded disinformation campaigns spread by motivated deniers of climate change.

That is from Wikipedia's Misinformation post: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation#Countering_misinformation It contains a link showing a 1.3 degree rise in temperature since 1850. That is also meaningless. However, the argument is that 'consensus' is that the climate is changing.

So, what? The Earth is still a lot colder than is ever has been. Consensus is then used as an excuse to censure other opinions. That is criminal activity.

My point is that misinformation is in the eye of the beholder, and climate change is hardly the only such activity. The Earth would still be flat if we followed the wisdom of consensus.

My reason for addressing the climate change hypothetical was that many other topics, e.g., the theory that gender is other than a grammatical construct that includes male, female and neuter arbitrarily assigned to words, e.g., ships are 'she', is that climate is the least outrageous issue, the one least likely to raise blood pressures.

@TylerH So what is the misinformation policy about? It is an open door to censorship, and it is illegal in those jurisdictions in which freedom of speech is legally mandated. So, the site is breaking the law with such a policy.

What law is the site breakign?