Reporter fired for questioning vaccines and climate changeThursday, February 23, 2017 by: Ethan Huff
Tags: fired, global warming, meteorologist
Misha Michaels from WGBH in Boston was told by her bosses at the station that she “is not a good fit” after it was revealed that she had supported a legislative bill allowing parents to forego vaccinating their children. Michaels also posted information on her website contradicting the official narrative on man-made global warming, writing that she believes “strongly that politics has warped the scientific process and natural variation has a much stronger hand than humans do.”
These are quite reasonable positions for a person to take — and more importantly, they’re personal ones that every American is afforded under the First Amendment. But Michaels’ colleagues weren’t too happy once they found out that she held these views, and quickly ratted Michaels out to her bosses. Not long after, Michaels was told she was no longer employed as a science reporter for the “Greater Boston” show.
Even after deleting the “inflammatory” comments from her website, Michaels remained blacklisted from the station, bearing the scarlet letter of a politically-incorrect skeptic in a world that requires 100 percent compliance with the official government narrative. Even though WGBH hired Michaels knowing full well what she believed, that decision was ultimately overruled by the scientific oligarchs who refuse to have their dogmas questioned.
“I am saddened by the sudden end of my position as science reporter at WGBH,” reads a statement issued by Michaels after her firing. “I worked tirelessly for more than two decades as a broadcast meteorologist, storm chaser, and science reporter. Scientific consensus does not equal complacency. It is a challenge to scientists to verify the science or push it forward.”
French reporter also fired for questioning global warming in 2015A similar browbeating took place in France back in 2015 when top weatherman Philippe Verdier was fired from his position after questioning the politicization of science by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which had been exposed for publishing false data and fake science. Verdier was later hired by Russia’s RT newspaper to cover the United Nation’s climate summit in Paris that same year.
“In 2007, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Al Gore and the IPCC climate change experts,” Verdier said on RT. “They told us ‘if we don’t deal with climate change, there will be more risks to have wars.’ But for 20 years, we are experiencing the warmest years and we have a parallel decline in wars and declining numbers of victims from conflicts.”
Commenting on these types of situations, Dr. Pat Michaels, a climatologist at the Cato Institute, used the word “shameful” to describe them. Rather than allowing freedom of thought and expression, allowing the public to decide on their own what’s true and what isn’t as it relates to climate science, the pseudo-science mafia would rather control the narrative at all costs, even when it means firing good people for doing absolutely nothing wrong.
“… the folks at WGBH could actually really do their listeners a service,” Michaels is quoted as saying by One News Now. “And they would discover it’s not very much like it’s supposed to be. It’s supposed to be warming up much faster than it is.” (RELATED: More on the developments of climate change science is available at ClimateScienceNews.com)