Each post of yours in this thread is doubling down on the false equivalence.
The grievances you are expressing are real, but so trivial in magnitude relative to what you're comparing them to, that you sound absurd.
The grievances you are expressing are real, but so trivial in magnitude relative to what you're comparing them to, that you sound absurd.
- Global warming isn't real, and if it is, definitely not caused by fossil fuels: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/18/the-forg...
- PFAS are totally safe, trust DuPont https://time.com/6284266/pfas-forever-chemicals-manufacturer...
- Opioids are not addictive, in fact, you need more of them to "manage" your pain, trust us, Purdue Pharma, and our very reliable studies: https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/bioethics/ar...
Those fraudulent studies happened in "free" countries, sponsored by mega-corporations. And, if we are talking about Iranian repression, it's worth mentioning that in our "free" countries at the moment if you say the truth: that Israel is doing a genocide in Gaza, you can easily get arrested or worse (sometimes without due process).
One could also argue that the heating/burning planet we are having right now, the toxic water runoff that can't be rid of forever chems are much more harmful for life on earth than some backwards religious fundamentalists that suppress any dissent in their backwards medieval country (Iran). ON the topic of religious fundamentalism, the US, instead of looking at Iran, should maybe worry about its very own rise of religious fundamentalism and rampant repression and dissent-squashing tactics of its own government.
Can it be possible to do both:
- Worry about the quality of questionable studies done in a repressed country like Iran
- At the same time as doubting the veracity of corporate-sponsored studies done at the behest of all-powerful multinationals in "free" countries like the US.
a.) your paper refuting those claims doesn't get widespread coverage
b.) your paper refuting those claims gets you beaten to death on the streets, or imprisoned and totured to death in prison (or even just imprisoned and released some time later)
This isn't even _good_ whataboutism
You can definitely go in jail for going against big oil:
For example, environmental lawyer Steven Donzinger was placed under arrest for exposing the crimes against the planet of big oil: https://www.amnesty.org.uk/urgent-actions/environmental-lawy...
You can also be financially ruined: https://climatebase.org/blog/greenpeace-slapped-by-big-oil-s...
You, a scientist, can also be deported for your views if they don't align with the state's false narrative: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/11/mahmoud-khal...
You can even get some death threats for doing your job by debunking disinformation: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/03/anth...
I'd say it's pretty good whataboutism, the parallels are more than enough. Iran was a progressive country with flourishing science before nationalistic/religious fundamentalists took over, sadly the US taking its first steps on the same path.
OK, you may have found a point of commonality in our opinions. The US isn't yet as far down that road, but... yeah. It's catching up quickly.
But the present debate started with the false equivalence between science in "free countries" being influenced by various corporate and political interests, vs being influenced by theocratic dictatorship inclided towards torture and murder.
That the US is becoming increasingly more like Iran doesn't negate that, it just makes the US not the right example to demonstrate the point.