Following up with BBC.
Evidence previously overlooked has been resubmitted, and further research will be provided in collaboration with the Digital Assets Research Institute to push for a necessary retraction.
I have requested that the case remain open.
nostr:note15yyk6x0cnmehj80qwaftv7qpk8pgwutz5ku6s3ujvz8hcupn2k2q2rpj7c
Makes you wonder whether the other 99% of the things they say, corroborated by experts and global scientific consensus, is also lies. Doesn't it?
I tune in to the BBC from time to time just to hear what they have to say. Once you see past the veneer, it becomes clear that much of what they present isn’t well-researched, isn’t balanced, and is clearly pushing an agenda. It’s state media, and they need to be defunded.
I love this. People will be very cautious about criticising bitcoin when there's well thought out pushback like this
I hope so, but at the same time, they seem so corrupt, powerful, and arrogant that I wonder if it will have any effect.
The world is getting orange pilled one person at a time. We'll definitely see waves of pushback against bitcoin, but gradually it will become very unpopular to write hit pieces against it.
In time the same corruption that allows fiat to steer the narrative will be co-opted by the better money.
Doing Gods work 🫡
When I see factual errors and bias in BBC reporting on things I know about, it definitely makes me wonder about the accuracy of their journalism on topics I’m not as familiar with. Unfortunately, there’s no opportunity cost for them to change their ways as we have to pay our TV licenses to fund them regardless. All we can hope for is that when we publicly challenge them about spreading misinformation, open-minded members of the public come across it and decide to form their opinions from sources other than the BBC.
Are you trying to get the original paper by De Vries retracted or the BBC piece?
For now, the BBC article. The problem with de Vries’ work is that it has spread like a disease.
