[plaguepilled]

You're being downvoted for not liking Quanta, but if your original point was that Quanta is not a good reporter, you're right.

They frequently make subtle but impactful misinterpretations, or more outrageous redirections, such as the Quantum Gravity fiasco from earlier this year. To excuse that is to participate in Gell Man amnesia, in my view.

[ars]

No, he's being downvoted for just wanting a "ban" with zero reasoning.

If he had wrote it like you are there might be discussion and disagreement with him, but not the flagging that he got.

[jovial_cavalier]

I didn't think it needed explaining. Every article from them is crap.

Like I did end up clicking TFA. It's just some rambling about how some math from QM also describes weather patterns. But the title is clearly bait to get you to think that the weather is somehow quantum.

I'm not a physicist, and I'm not a mathematician - I'm a computer engineer. I've studied physics, and I've studied math. I'm not terrible at it. I should be the target audience for Quanta - someone who isn't a professional but may be interested in new results. However, every time I read one of their articles, I feel dumber (and not in a good way). I can't imagine how someone who didn't go to college or didn't take the physics classes I took is possibly benefited by reading this. I think it could only serve to confuse them.

[plaguepilled]

It's arguably obvious to those with relevant training, so perhaps he didn't realise justification was needed.