Greta Thunberg & Extinction Rebellion

[Highgate]

13 hours ago, Chester40 said:

Err not ignoring scientists. Just slightly doubtful, and not especially wanting to believe.Then she gives me a good excuse to not listen at all. 

Who said anything about sense? 

What do you doubt?   Let me try to persuade you  ?

 

[Angry Ram]

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

What do you doubt?   Let me try to persuade you  ?

 

You are Al Gore, I claim my £5.00

[Bob The Badger]

9 hours ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Wow! I suppose when one finds cracking jokes about other people’s wives having the clap funny, memes must indeed be truly hilarious. Time to up your game old boy. 

The clap?

I was referring to the chicken pox doctor, or pox doctor as we refer to Alf round these parts.

 

[Angry Ram]

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

What do you doubt?   Let me try to persuade you  ?

 

I know, I know, Fox News so you will dismiss.

[Comrade 86]

13 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

The clap?

I was referring to the chicken pox doctor, or pox doctor as we refer to Alf round these parts.

 

Pox Doctor

Noun. A doctor specializing in the treatment of venereal disease. "got up like a pox doctor's clerk" and variants: dressed smartly but in bad taste; overdressed. Also figurative, rare before 20th cent.

Stop digging old chap! 

[Bob The Badger]

47 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Pox Doctor

Noun. A doctor specializing in the treatment of venereal disease. "got up like a pox doctor's clerk" and variants: dressed smartly but in bad taste; overdressed. Also figurative, rare before 20th cent.

Stop digging old chap! 

Oh you, you've caught me out.

I feel so foolish now, I thought I'd pulled the wool over your eyes, but you're clearly far too smart for me.

I know when I've met my match, I shall bow out with whatever dignity I have left.

Which is probably none before you spear me once again.

 

[1of4]

2 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

I know, I know, Fox News so you will dismiss.

Fake News, sorry Fox News, interviews someone from the Cato Institute, an organisation funded by the Koch brothers. The Koch's own a hugh industrial conglomerate and hold some very extreme views. So yep I think I'll dismiss this piece of nonsense.

[Highgate]

26 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

I know, I know, Fox News so you will dismiss.

I've actually seen this clip before. You've cherry picked one of the very few climatologists who doesn't believe that we are heading for a climate disaster.  Unsurprisingly Fox News have done exactly the same.  Had they wished to give their viewers an accurate representation of what the climate science professionals actually think about Global Warming, then they would have followed this interview up with 40 more interviews where the climatologists explains just how bad Global Warming is and why humans are responsible for it. 

Out of curiosity I have previously read some of Dr. Michaels work, and while I don't doubt his educational credentials as such, his output is of a poor standard.  I'd say he is very much the Claude Davis of the Climatology.  Even years ago, he already had a long history of not so accurate predictions.

https://skepticalscience.com/patrick-michaels-history-getting-climate-wrong.html

Incidentally another prominent figure in the Climate Change Denying community is Jeremy Corbyn's older brother Piers, although he is a weather forecaster rather than a climatologist.

Turns out you've been a Corbynite all along ?

[Bob The Badger]

3 hours ago, 1of4 said:

Fake News, sorry Fox News, interviews someone from the Cato Institute, an organisation funded by the Koch brothers. The Koch's own a hugh industrial conglomerate and hold some very extreme views. So yep I think I'll dismiss this piece of nonsense.

It's actually the Koch Brother now as David died earlier this year.

And he's right @Angry Ram they have funded far right groups for decades investing hundreds of millions of dollars into all sorts of stuff from climate change denial to right wing think thanks.

It was one such think tank that brought in the guy whose name escapes me now who was responsible for the deliberate shift of language by Republican politicians to change the public's perception of hot button topics.

They didn't especially invent the phrase, in fact, I think it was first used in public by Thatcher, but they adopted climate change when for years it had been global warming. The former sounds softer and fits in with the fact that climate does change.

They also, under George W Bush, kept ramming home compassionate conservatism message when it's almost an oxymoron. Similarly, under Trump they have talked about the removal of environmental protections as rolling back regulation.

If you frame something as a regulation then people are 'yeh, we need less regulation by big Government'. They're not so keen to have protections removed however.

The conservatives have absolutely crushed the Dems on this front over the last four decades or so and a lot has been down to the very deep pockets of big business who just love being able to do things like pollute rivers again because their buddy Trump lifted the ban on pollutants being dumped.

One of the first executive orders that Trump signed when he took office was to roll back a regulation on animal food manufacture using known carcinogens in pet food. 

You do have to look at the source though. Fox news peddle all sorts of conspiracy stories and Sean Hannity is a defacto Trump senior advisor speaking with him most evenings.

If you want to know what Fox news is doing at any one time, watch Trump's Twitter stream. I bet close to half of it is him regurgitating Fox news stories.

Sadly, the real (if still heavily conservative) journalists At Fox like Shepard Smith and Chris Wallace have either resigned in despair  in the former case, or being squeezed and pilloried for speaking up against a mentally ill President in the latter case. 

So people like Hannity and the raving mad Tucker Carlson are left to spew their vile rhetoric. 

 

[Bob The Badger]

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

  I'd say he is very much the Claude Davis of the Climatology.  

PMSL!

[Highgate]

Just now, Bob The Badger said:

It was one such think tank that brought in the guy whose name escapes me now who was responsible for the deliberate shift of language by Republican politicians to change the public's perception of hot button topics.

Fred Luntz ?

[Bob The Badger]

12 minutes ago, Highgate said:

Fred Luntz ?

That's the man. I should have remembered because I knew it rhymed with something that was fitting!

And btw, you make a good point about Claude Davis.

The public tend to think a scientist is a scientist is a scientist, when indeed, like football players and every walk of life there are good ones and bad ones.

Over 150 historians came out to sign an open letter to say what Trump did was impeachable, but of course Fox News found a historian who disagreed and said, 'see, opinion is divided on the subject'

 

 

[Angry Ram]

16 hours ago, 1of4 said:

Fake News, sorry Fox News, interviews someone from the Cato Institute, an organisation funded by the Koch brothers. The Koch's own a hugh industrial conglomerate and hold some very extreme views. So yep I think I'll dismiss this piece of nonsense.

Easy to just wave that away, well done, as I knew some would. What about you and @Highgateaddressing some of the points he made. 

Im on the fence with the whole thing.. Over to you lot to convince me. 

[1of4]

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

Easy to just wave that away, well done, as I knew some would. What about you and @Highgateaddressing some of the points he made. 

Im on the fence with the whole thing.. Over to you lot to convince me. 

Would love to have the time to find the time to find links to the twenty odd reports on global warming, that were mentioned in the interview. I could try to convince you about the dangers that face our environment, but I'm less articulate than Greta and people say they can't be bothered to listen to her.

[Highgate]

3 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

Easy to just wave that away, well done, as I knew some would. What about you and @Highgateaddressing some of the points he made. 

Im on the fence with the whole thing.. Over to you lot to convince me. 

He made quite a few claims there, what aspect would you most like to see addressed?  

Let's start with some common ground, he doesn't dispute that GHGs ( he focuses on Carbon Dioxide) are warming the planet up or will continue to do so, he just thinks that the warming is not and will not be as severe as the vast majority of other climatologists believe. Is that fair ? 

 

[Bob The Badger]

5 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

Easy to just wave that away, well done, as I knew some would. What about you and @Highgateaddressing some of the points he made. 

Im on the fence with the whole thing.. Over to you lot to convince me. 

Well I tried to convince you that if you're going to throw up one side of an argument you need to be careful and use a credible source.

Fox news has a big business conservative driven agenda.

They're a news organization in name only - almost everything is opinion driven

TBF, from the left, CNN and MSNBC are pretty much opinion driven also and that's frustrating. However, what they don't do that Fox news do do is invent stuff and peddle conspiracy theories.

There was a guy called Seth Rich who worked for the  Democratic National Committee (DNC) and was murdered in 2017.

A conspiracy theory arose on one of the far right nutjob channels like Infowars or Breitbart that he was involved in the leaking of the DNC emails before the 2016 election. And it was a hit job by the Democratic Party. Some even went as far as to say the Clintons ordered it.

It was all disproven and his family came out and asked people to stop suggesting this.

Only last month one of the opinion anchors - I think it was Laura Ingraham, but not 100% sure  - brought this up again.

That is Fox News modus operandi.

The point is, that Fox are looking for anything that supports their agenda even if it's dubious at best or flat out wrong, or fabricated, at worst. If they want a climate change denier with a science background, then of course they will find one.

As for other people having to convince you. Well that is flat out lazy.

It's actually up to you to either live in denial, or go and research what is happening for yourself.

I actually don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with living in denial if it keeps people happy. I do have a problem with willful ignorance though (and I'm not meaning you here, just in general), and there's an epidemic of that.

[CWC1983]

 

[Angry Ram]

4 hours ago, Bob The Badger said:

Well I tried to convince you that if you're going to throw up one side of an argument you need to be careful and use a credible source.

Fox news has a big business conservative driven agenda.

They're a news organization in name only - almost everything is opinion driven

TBF, from the left, CNN and MSNBC are pretty much opinion driven also and that's frustrating. However, what they don't do that Fox news do do is invent stuff and peddle conspiracy theories.

There was a guy called Seth Rich who worked for the  Democratic National Committee (DNC) and was murdered in 2017.

A conspiracy theory arose on one of the far right nutjob channels like Infowars or Breitbart that he was involved in the leaking of the DNC emails before the 2016 election. And it was a hit job by the Democratic Party. Some even went as far as to say the Clintons ordered it.

It was all disproven and his family came out and asked people to stop suggesting this.

Only last month one of the opinion anchors - I think it was Laura Ingraham, but not 100% sure  - brought this up again.

That is Fox News modus operandi.

The point is, that Fox are looking for anything that supports their agenda even if it's dubious at best or flat out wrong, or fabricated, at worst. If they want a climate change denier with a science background, then of course they will find one.

As for other people having to convince you. Well that is flat out lazy.

It's actually up to you to either live in denial, or go and research what is happening for yourself.

I actually don't necessarily think there is anything wrong with living in denial if it keeps people happy. I do have a problem with willful ignorance though (and I'm not meaning you here, just in general), and there's an epidemic of that.

So all those words and you have not managed to dispel one thing on the video. I know he is this and works for that... So do a lot of the pro climate lobbyists. BUT what about what he says?

 

[Bob The Badger]

2 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

So all those words and you have not managed to dispel one thing on the video. I know he is this and works for that... So do a lot of the pro climate lobbyists. BUT what about what he says?

 

You missed the entire point.

I'm not trying to dispel anything on the video because I'm not even going to watch it.  

I'm not interested in gathering information from sources where there is a agenda other than science and the reporting of science.

Fox News has  a captive audience of right of center people, a great many of whom don't really want to learn (or are flat out stupid), they just want their beliefs corroborated and massaged.

If Fox News were a UK newspaper it would be The Sun.

Would you look to form opinions on science from The Sun?

This kind of interview starts off with the end in mind, it's a set up.

That is the antithesis of science.

I expect you to come back that I'm being close-minded, because that is the usual retort in these kind of situations.

But it's the opposite of that.

There's nothing open minded about ignoring unbiased credible data so you can extract some that chooses the position you have already adopted.

Now, if this were a trend.. Or if the scientific community was genuinely split, even only 70 - 30, then that's different.

If you were to go back into the late 70's you would be able to find a doctor here and there who would still insist the connection between smoking and lung disease was unproven.

And do you know why you'd find them?

Because they were being funded by the tobacco companies to look for any evidence that may, just may, undermine the link.

You can usually find stuff if you look hard enough.

Big business is pouring billions of dollars into supporting climate change deniers and employing lobbyists.

The motor trade alone spend hundreds of millions of dollars paying lobbyists in Congress to influence public policy because it's costing them so much money.

All this is documented, it's not a hunch.

But, most people don't know or just don't care because, ya know, they saw a guy on Fox News say everything would be okay.

And come on, no way would Rupert Murdoch be doing anything that served him and his billionaire friends at the expense of the public.

 

[Angry Ram]

29 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

You missed the entire point.

I'm not trying to dispel anything on the video because I'm not even going to watch it.  

I'm not interested in gathering information from sources where there is a agenda other than science and the reporting of science.

Fox News has  a captive audience of right of center people, a great many of whom don't really want to learn (or are flat out stupid), they just want their beliefs corroborated and massaged.

If Fox News were a UK newspaper it would be The Sun.

Would you look to form opinions on science from The Sun?

This kind of interview starts off with the end in mind, it's a set up.

That is the antithesis of science.

I expect you to come back that I'm being close-minded, because that is the usual retort in these kind of situations.

But it's the opposite of that.

There's nothing open minded about ignoring unbiased credible data so you can extract some that chooses the position you have already adopted.

Now, if this were a trend.. Or if the scientific community was genuinely split, even only 70 - 30, then that's different.

If you were to go back into the late 70's you would be able to find a doctor here and there who would still insist the connection between smoking and lung disease was unproven.

And do you know why you'd find them?

Because they were being funded by the tobacco companies to look for any evidence that may, just may, undermine the link.

You can usually find stuff if you look hard enough.

Big business is pouring billions of dollars into supporting climate change deniers and employing lobbyists.

The motor trade alone spend hundreds of millions of dollars paying lobbyists in Congress to influence public policy because it's costing them so much money.

All this is documented, it's not a hunch.

But, most people don't know or just don't care because, ya know, they saw a guy on Fox News say everything would be okay.

And come on, no way would Rupert Murdoch be doing anything that served him and his billionaire friends at the expense of the public.

 

No I really didn’t miss the point at all.. I know all about Kato and Fox.