A climate scientist from Johns Hopkins University, Patrick T. Brown, recently admitted that he has been forced to self-censor to have his research published in ‘woke’ scientific journals that support only one biased narrative, The Daily Mail reports.

In a recent article for The Free Press entitled, “I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Climate Change Paper Published”, Brown states that he left out several important details to ensure his contribution to an article for Nature got published.

This includes omitting such facts as over 80% of wildfires are started by humans and that poor forest management is another major contributing factor.

The Daily Mail provides more details:

Brown gave the example of a paper he recently authored titled ‘Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California‘. Brown said the paper, published in Nature last week, ‘focuses exclusively on how climate change has affected extreme wildfire behavior’ and ignored other key factors.

Brown laid out his claims in an article titled ‘I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Climate Change Paper Published’. ‘I just got published in Nature because I stuck to a narrative I knew the editors would like. That’s not the way science should work,’ the article begins.

“This matters because it is critically important for scientists to be published in high-profile journals; in many ways, they are the gatekeepers for career success in academia. And the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society.

To put it bluntly, climate science has become less about understanding the complexities of the world and more about serving as a kind of Cassandra, urgently warning the public about the dangers of climate change. However understandable this instinct may be, it distorts a great deal of climate science research, misinforms the public, and most importantly, makes practical solutions more difficult to achieve.’”

READ: Top scientist Patrick Brown says he deliberately OMITTED key fact in climate change piece he’s just had published in prestigious journal to ensure woke editors ran it – that 80% of wildfires are started by humans

In his article for The Free Press, Brown adds that you also can not mention practical solutions to how people can adapt to climate change in these scientific journals, because there is apparently only one approved solution, stop oil.

He writes:

“This leads to a second unspoken rule in writing a successful climate paper. The authors should ignore—or at least downplay—practical actions that can counter the impact of climate change. If deaths due to extreme heat are decreasing and crop yields are increasing, then it stands to reason that we can overcome some major negative effects of climate change. Shouldn’t we then study how we have been able to achieve success so that we can facilitate more of it? Of course we should. But studying solutions rather than focusing on problems is simply not going to rouse the public—or the press. Besides, many mainstream climate scientists tend to view the whole prospect of, say, using technology to adapt to climate change as wrongheaded; addressing emissions is the right approach. So the savvy researcher knows to stay away from practical solutions.”

READ: I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Climate Change Paper Published

More on those ‘so-called’ scientific journals: Report: Nearly 25% of medical science papers and 34% of neuroscience papers are bogus