😂
Media/Journalism Cringe Megathread - Hot off the Presses
- Thread starter Cherico
- Start date
That pastor is a fool and a partisan hack.
Also, the Left have not been wrong on every single environmental issue.
That is more cope the Right tells itself so it doesn't have to address issues. The Left can be overzealous or overwrought on some environmental issues, but the Rights response of basically ignoring all environmental things till Trump came along has definitely contributed why the incorrect public image of the Right as corpo lackeys who only care about Big Oil.
I have tried repeatedly, with multiple kinds of links and evidence, to bridge the gap; no one here wants to hear it most of the time.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
No, you were just echoing more fear-mongering from the left. Remember what happened with your 'methane bubble' thing? I looked through all of your sources, and every single one of them was 'might,' or 'may,' or 'could mean' types of things.
And again, every single disastrous climate prediction whose date we've reached has been proven false.
Further, the idea that the right doesn't believe in addressing environmental issues is also a leftist lie propagated to the point of becoming 'accepted wisdom' through their long monopoly, and more recent near-monopoly, of media control. There are plenty of conservatives concerned about the environment, but they're concerned about practical, tangible problems, like 'what condition is the local wildlife in?' or 'This local lake/river has serious problems,' or 'there's an oil spill that needs to be cleaned up.'
You know, issues that you can both directly perceive and directly effect, and therefore can't be used to justify an endless crusade that will always require giving more power and authority to the government.
Bluntly put, all you're doing here is demonstrating exactly what I said. There are many leftist lies that have at best a tiny kernel of truth to them, that you still buy into. Until you get off your moral high horse, and actually face the facts (such as the left being wrong about every element of environmental alarmism they've raised), your mind will be held captive by leftist lies.
@Bacle
My problem with the environmentalists is the doomsayers that say we have to castrate ourselves economically in order to stop something that we can't stop.
You want to bring something up, that is within our power to change and I'll have that conversation with you.
As for the idea that the left is the only group that cares about the environment, that's a load of bullcrap.
The right is generally leading the effort at conservation of wildlands and natural habitats.
My problem with the environmentalists is the doomsayers that say we have to castrate ourselves economically in order to stop something that we can't stop.
You want to bring something up, that is within our power to change and I'll have that conversation with you.
As for the idea that the left is the only group that cares about the environment, that's a load of bullcrap.
The right is generally leading the effort at conservation of wildlands and natural habitats.
Robovski
Well-known member
"The Left" is full of feelgood efforts and laws that at best do nothing and generally make things worse when it comes to addressing environmental issues. Let's ban straws! Let's make people ask for glasses of water at restaurants! Let's make people use way more plastic for their groceries by making everyone use much heavier plastic bags! Let's close the nuclear power plants while continuing to use fucking COAL to power LA. Can't use a rail line into the port, that would "increase air pollution" over the bazillion trucks that drive into the port currently. The Fuck.
I'm not doing this again, not when no matter what links I put up, most of you will not accept them as legit until shit's already fucked and it's too late to do anything about it.
I could try to sell it as practice at making terraforming tech for future pff-planet colonies, but even that would not make much of a difference.
The problem with the Right on environmental issues; it is always reactive, and is suspicious of anyone who wants to be proactive, or even have a convo about being proactive.
I could pay for a JSTOR account and let you all see the raw data, and even that wouldn't do shit.
I could try to sell it as practice at making terraforming tech for future pff-planet colonies, but even that would not make much of a difference.
The problem with the Right on environmental issues; it is always reactive, and is suspicious of anyone who wants to be proactive, or even have a convo about being proactive.
I could pay for a JSTOR account and let you all see the raw data, and even that wouldn't do shit.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
If your links actually supported your position, you might have a point here.
But you just refuse to recognize that conjecture is not the same as facts.
ShadowsOfParadox
Well-known member
The Right gets called "Corpo Lapdogs": "I'm making Jobs!"
The Left gets called "Corpo Lapdogs": "I'm Protecting the Environment!"
The problem with Leftist Climate Alarmism is that as far people on the Right can see, it's a bunch of ado about actually nothing because none of the steps that would cause real, immediate, effects are ever taken.
We could get off coal power plants in the next five years, we'd just need to massively expand Nuclear Power, and whatever your worries about Nuclear Waste, it's not ever going to be "THE PLANET IS DOOMED IN TEN YEARS". Instead, Germany shuts down all it's nuclear plants in response to a disaster meltdown in Japan that is literally IMPOSSIBLE in Germany. Instead, they wanna ban cars while we still have no actual replacement.
The Left gets called "Corpo Lapdogs": "I'm Protecting the Environment!"
The problem with Leftist Climate Alarmism is that as far people on the Right can see, it's a bunch of ado about actually nothing because none of the steps that would cause real, immediate, effects are ever taken.
We could get off coal power plants in the next five years, we'd just need to massively expand Nuclear Power, and whatever your worries about Nuclear Waste, it's not ever going to be "THE PLANET IS DOOMED IN TEN YEARS". Instead, Germany shuts down all it's nuclear plants in response to a disaster meltdown in Japan that is literally IMPOSSIBLE in Germany. Instead, they wanna ban cars while we still have no actual replacement.
No, I just do not have access to the academic databases where I learned shit and could give non-media based, actual scientific journal articles to work from.
I cannot condense years of environmental and scientific education into a neat post here, I could barely fit it into a several day long TEDTalk if went that route, and that would not mean much without people having the parts I've seen in said databases in thier own hands.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
...So your argument is 'Trust me, I did the research, but I can't show it to you.'
And you're surprised that people who've dealt with decades of proven lies on the subject don't accept that argument?
Jerry Saltz, New York Times SENIOR 'Art Critic' wants to you share in how disgusted he is with White people getting guns for Christmas.
He be getting ratio'd though at least. So that's nice.
He be getting ratio'd though at least. So that's nice.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
Add me to the list of people he's disgusted with. My dad found a good deal for me on a pump action .30-06, and gave me a .22 semi-auto.
I've entered the range of acceptable armament for an adult American.
Do you have any idea how much a JSTOR account costs? The only reason I could even see into them is because the college I was at had accounts for students to use for research projects.
I have tried to find links and articles that say the same things I've seen in the databases, but they get brushed off as mediahype or lies or 'conjecture' no matter how many I link or cross reference on the same subject.
I'm not trying to pull a Zachowan with his 'its classified, you have to trust me' shit; I have tried to link to things in good faith using what sources I can find that aren't paywalled behind JSTOR or the like, and no one gives them any credit.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
Yes, and we don't give them credit as supporting your argument because the 'it could mean' and 'possible effect' lines are within the articles you linked.
You're not the only one who's done research over the years, and your claims fit exactly the pattern of the long litany of disproven leftist alarmism. You're going to need to present a very clear, strong case to overcome that, and articles that are clearly written to support the leftist alarmism narrative, while carefully using language that retains plausible deniability for those who write it, are not going to provide that clear, strong case.
ShadowsOfParadox
Well-known member
Latest global polar bear abundance ‘best guess’ estimate is 39,000 (26,000-58,000)
It’s long past time for polar bear specialists to stop holding out for a scientifically accurate global estimate that will never be achieved and determine a reasonable and credible ‘bes…
polarbearscience.com
Is a fact inconvenient? Ignore it and bury anyone who tries to bring it up.
Is a fact potentially inconvenient? Ignore it and never ever ever do any (official)research into it ever.
And this has been a thing since the start. Just like the fact that we had Nuclear as an option before Climate Alarmism became a thing and regardless, it's never been brought up as a serious option even just to help transition over to renewables.
Climate Alarmists never seem to have actual, practical solutions, just things that make life worse for the poor and empower the government.
Guess what, environmental science rarely comes with the certainties you are demanding for 'credibility', even in academic papers. Environmental science is always evolving, always refining itself, and they only use the certainity you want is when shit has already happened.
It is not all alarmism, that is Right wing cope used to not address things and dismiss even examinimg issues to see what solutions can be found.Here's yet another example of a problem with Climate Alarmism, in particular
Latest global polar bear abundance ‘best guess’ estimate is 39,000 (26,000-58,000)
It’s long past time for polar bear specialists to stop holding out for a scientifically accurate global estimate that will never be achieved and determine a reasonable and credible ‘bes…
Is a fact inconvenient? Ignore it and bury anyone who tries to bring it up.
Is a fact potentially inconvenient? Ignore it and never ever ever do any (official)research into it ever.
And this has been a thing since the start. Just like the fact that we had Nuclear as an option before Climate Alarmism became a thing and regardless, it's never been brought up as a serious option even just to help transition over to renewables.
Climate Alarmists never seem to have actual, practical solutions, just things that make life worse for the poor and empower the government.
But I also know that even if I could get JSTOR access for everyone here to use as they wish, any time they wish, it would not matter much.
Because even if people here actually could accept some issues are not just 'Lefty lies', it would become an issue of 'well the CCP isn't doing shit, so neither should we', because apparently they hate the CCP in every way but their retarded handling of environmental issues.
Bigking321
Well-known member
So what has the left done to help environmental stuff?
Let's see, supported the EPA Clean Air and Water Acts, supported expanding National Parks, expanding the Endangered Species Act, pushed for bans on damaging off-shore waste dumping, kept oil drilling out of ANWAR, pushed for an end to atmospheric nuke testing, grilled the CCP about the whole 'shark fin soup'/shark overfishing issue, dealt with the hole in the ozone layer via banning CFCs in r fridgerants and that's just off the top of my head.
ShadowsOfParadox
Well-known member
And we are still on coal, and they've never even tried to push for Nuclear.
Things that don't actually cost anything and things that people wanted anyway. The only time they ever seem to want to do anything about the things they claim will cause "THE WORLD TO END IN TEN YEARS!!!"(every ten years on the docket) is when it'll meaningfully increase government power over individuals or make life harder for individuals.
Bigking321
Well-known member
And how many of those had bipartisan support? Or in the case of oil drilling in Anwar were a huge mistake?