One of the very few ideas worse than allowing climate change to run unchecked, or to gleefully promote garbage-level misinformation about climate change, is to suppress speech because someone claims they know better than someone else.

This is awful. If people can't tell the difference between a well-informed source and profit-seeking garbage even with a comment informing them of the distinction then we have bigger problems than them being exposed to some poor information.

We have a problem that people are gullible idiots. You don't fix that by strengthening your means of delivering those ideas that you think are good for them: that leads directly to authoritarian populism. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Now, what might make sense is that if climate change manure-producers all block you and anyone else who has, I don't know, at least read IPCC AR5, understands the difference between peaking power and non-, realizes that tides and weather are not the same as sea level rise and climate change (and can reason usefully about the degree of change compared to the range of natural variation, while understanding that it is the extremal not typical events that tend to drive problems), then maybe the manure-producers should face censure in some way. Then you have an argument that actually they are the ones trying to suppress free discourse: in a way totally consistent with Medium policy, but in a societally harmful way nonetheless at every level.

Short of that, though, the solution is to give good information, encourage people to think, and call out irresponsible behavior.

Also, maybe use "literally" correctly...even though it's a logical fallacy to think so, "Jan literally can't tell the difference between literally and figuratively, and yet we're supposed to believe that he's smarter than U.H.?" is a tempting fallacy. No reason to give people the excuse.

For emphasis, one can use "such a", "total", "complete"; vary "manure" with "dumpster fire" and other things...and there is the perfectly functional word "figuratively" when you literally mean figuratively. One's expressivity remains almost entirely unconstrained.