OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[hineyrulz]

That'll learn ya for using Hineyrulz's old ones.

An infection would be the least of his problems.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Sure bloke.

It's pretty obvious this kind of shit was being done, it's not like it was a well kept secret or anything.

Governments were doing what they could to control messaging, this is nothing new. The only thing new is that there's a whole new bunch of plebs who think this is some kind of revelation, mostly I guess that for the first time in their lives they worked out it was directed at them, so sad, too bad.

Well no. It gave everyday people the illusion of a consensus when there was anything but. And they assumed that if stuff was being censored it was because it was untrue, which is false. And I think you'll find that censorship of social media on this scale is actually new. But yeah, a big nothing burger.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Governments were doing what they could to control messaging, this is nothing new. The only thing new is that there's a whole new bunch of plebs who think this is some kind of revelation, mostly I guess that for the first time in their lives they worked out it was directed at them, so sad, too bad.

This.

 

[Gronk]

At least you didn't ban him. That's actually a point in your favour that you don't do that much. Maybe have a word to your colleagues?

I don’t make the rules mate. Everyone agrees to posting guidlines when they sign up. Even you.

The Front Row Forums - Member's Guidelines » League Unlimited

leagueunlimited.com

The X rules: safety, privacy, authenticity, and more

Understand the limitations on the type of content and behavior that we allow, to ensure free and safe conversation.

help.twitter.com

 

[Gronk]

1,200 Scientists and Professionals Declare: “There is No Climate Emergency” – The Daily Sceptic

First we had the Great Barrington Declaration, challenging the 'settled' scientific consensus about lockdowns. Now comes the World Climate Declaration, challenging the computer models predicting environmental catastrophe.

dailysceptic.org

Fact check: Did 1,200 climate experts sign viral misinformation?

A document claiming that 'there is no climate emergency' has been circulating on social media. #TheCube

www.euronews.com

A climate-denying document, supposedly signed by 1,200 leading scientists and academics, has gone viral on social media.

The "World Climate Declaration" -- which claims that there is "no climate emergency" -- was first shared on 27 June.

One Australian Senator shared the document on Facebook claiming that "this is further confirmation that there is no climate emergency".


Other well-known conspiracy groups have argued that there is no scientific consensus that humans are to blame for global warming because the “Earth's climate has varied since the planet first existed, with naturally occurring cold and warm phases".

A 2021 report by Cornell University found that 99.9% of more than 88,000 climate change studies agree that humans have accelerated the phenomenon, largely due to carbon emissions.

Moreover, the last 15 warmest years on record have occurred since 2005, with the most recent eight years being the warmest, according to NASA.

Investigations show that practically none of the signatories to the "World Climate Declaration" are climate scientists.


The two main Dutch actors behind the declaration are Guus Berkhout, a retired geophysicist who has worked for oil giant Shell, and journalist Marcel Crok.

Both have been accused of receiving money from fossil fuel companies to finance their climate-sceptic work. They deny the allegations,

When looking closer at the list of signatories, there are precisely 1,107, including six people who are dead. Less than 1% of the names listed describe themselves as climatologists or climate scientists.

Eight of the signatories are former or current employees of the oil giant Shell, while many other names have links to mining companies.

One of the signatories is Ivar Giaever, a joint winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1973 for work on superconductors. However, he has never published any work on climate science.

According to an independent 2019 count of the declaration's signatories, 21% were engineers, many linked to the fossil fuel industry. Others were lobbyists, and some even worked as fishermen or airline pilots.

 

[Bandwagon]

Well no. It gave everyday people the illusion of a consensus when there was anything but.

Regardless it conveyed the message that governments wanted to convey in order to deal with the situation, this is basically the "government lied to the people" , well f**k me sideways, this has never happened before.

And they assumed that if stuff was being censored it was because it was untrue, which is false.

This is subjective, what is an objective fact is that regardless of what is true or false, governments sought to control the messaging, again this is nothing new, it's been the case since the dawn of f**king civilisation.

And I think you'll find that censorship of social media on this scale is actually new. But yeah, a big nothing burger.

Social media is a relatively new form of media, and it's reach is growing, so scale is relative to that. Would it surprise you that Twitter wasn't actively influenced by government in say the early to mid 2000's?

So yeah, that's a moot point.

 

[Gronk]

^^^^^^

Climate 'declaration' recirculates debunked claims

A "World Climate Declaration" signed by more than 1,200 people and widely shared on social media challenges the scientific consensus on human-driven climate change. But only a small number of the signatories are climate scientists, some have links to the oil industry or climate-skeptic...

factcheck.afp.com

The declaration includes a series of climate science claims that have been debunked by climate experts. It gives no sources. AFP and other organizations have previously fact-checked several of the claims:

1. "Earth's climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases... Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming."

Experts cited in this AFP fact check said that the surge in global temperatures over the past 150 years has been abnormally sharp, driven by carbon emissions following industrialization.

2. "The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing... Climate policy relies on inadequate models."

This analysis by Carbon Brief showed that some models projected less warming than experienced and some projected more, but all showed surface temperature increases between 1970 and 2016 that were not far from what actually occurred. Experts defended the models in this AFP fact check.

3. "More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet. Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. "

Experts cited in this article by AFP Fact Check's German service said that plants can only process a limited share of the excess carbon dioxide emissions and suffer from the effects of climate change.

4. "There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. "

World Weather Attribution (WWA), using methods including observational analysis of historic datasets, has calculated that various disasters were made more likely due to climate change, including floods and storms. Its methodsare described in this AFP fact check on wildfires.

Read AFP's other fact checks about climate change here.

 

[Gary Gutful]

More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change | Cornell Chronicle

More than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is mainly caused by humans, according to a new survey of 88,125 climate-related studies.

news.cornell.edu

 

[Gary Gutful]

Of the 1,200 "scientists",134 are from Australia. I know many of the Australian "scientists" professionally. I can't believe some of them are listed. They aren't even scientists, let alone climate scientists. One of them is ship designer FFS!

Its a f**ken joke of a document. I'd laugh if it wasn't for the impact it has had on clueless, impressionable people.

 

[Incorrect]

Of the 1,200 "scientists",134 are from Australia. I know many of the Australian "scientists" professionally. I can't believe some of them are listed. They aren't even scientists, let alone climate scientists. One of them is ship designer FFS!

Its a f**ken joke of a document. I'd laugh if it wasn't for the impact it has had on clueless, impressionable people.

Well mate, when the polar ice caps are all melted and sea levels rise by 500 metres, you'll be f**kin' glad to have a ship designer on the team.... Better than some pencil necked geek in a white coat, spectacles and a mustard stained tie telling us all "I told you so!"

 

[Gary Gutful]

Well mate, when the polar ice caps are all melted and sea levels rise by 500 metres, you'll be f**kin' glad to have a ship designer on the team.... Better than some pencil necked geek in a white coat, spectacles and a mustard stained tie telling us all "I told you so!"

Not really based on the shit box Lada Nivas of the sea that this merkin designs and commissions.

 

[Gronk]

Of the 1,200 "scientists",134 are from Australia. I know many of the Australian "scientists" professionally. I can't believe some of them are listed. They aren't even scientists, let alone climate scientists. One of them is ship designer FFS!

Its a f**ken joke of a document. I'd laugh if it wasn't for the impact it has had on clueless, impressionable people.

There is that chap from James Cook Uni who got the sack, went to the High Court for unfair dismissal and now writes for Murdoch.

Clash over free speech and climate change being heard by High Court

This scientist claims he was unfairly dismissed from his job at James Cook University. The university claims he breached his contract. The High Court will now decide who was right.

www.abc.net.au

I personally know a chap who has been labelled a kook. Which is unfair because he’s not. However his analysis has been debunked by his peers and he’s quite staunch in his views.

Solving the mystery of climate change

I am absolutely 100% CERTAIN that radiation from greenhouse gases (water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane etc) does NOT do what NASA energy diagrams imply, namely combine with solar radiation to add more thermal energy into the surface so as to explain the surface temperatures of Earth and Venus which

www.linkedin.com

===================

There are many economic pragmatists who were against Covid lockdowns and are also against the economic cost of climate change. I think that’s fair enough because as Obama ^^^^^ said in his address, often those who pay the most are in the lower socioeconomic cohort. I absolutely agree with this, however don’t be dishonest when you are arguing your case. That merkin from QLD Matt Canavan is a prime example of someone who is dishonest when he argues the case against climate science.


I wonder why

 

[strider]

Regardless it conveyed the message that governments wanted to convey in order to deal with the situation, this is basically the "government lied to the people" , well f**k me sideways, this has never happened before.



This is subjective, what is an objective fact is that regardless of what is true or false, governments sought to control the messaging, again this is nothing new, it's been the case since the dawn of f**king civilisation.



Social media is a relatively new form of media, and it's reach is growing, so scale is relative to that. Would it surprise you that Twitter wasn't actively influenced by government in say the early to mid 2000's?

So yeah, that's a moot point.

Its a bit more than govt just controlling the narrative. .... where do you draw the line? ... there were perfectly well credentialled people getting slandered and shut down in the name of pursuing a single objective .... how do you know all those people were wrong? ... maybe the govt were making things worse? .... Just trust the govt got it all right this time round (while we shit can them endlessly about getting almost everything else wrong)

 

[Gary Gutful]

That merkin from QLD Matt Canavan is a prime example of someone who is dishonest when he argues the case against climate science.

No more dishonest than the Greens to be fair.

I would say both sides(a) are guilty of hyperbole more so than dishonesty.

(a) F**k you Bandy, I don’t care whether there are more than 2 sides. I’m only talking about two!

 

[Gary Gutful]

Its a bit more than govt just controlling the narrative. .... where do you draw the line? ... there were perfectly well credentialled people getting slandered and shut down in the name of pursuing a single objective .... how do you know all those people were wrong? ... maybe the govt were making things worse? .... Just trust the govt got it all right this time round (while we shit can them endlessly about getting almost everything else wrong)

That’s all fine. Just don’t pretend it’s something that’s never happened before and that only you and a select few of your mates understand it. Some of us understand it very well but have bigger issues to worry about.

P.S. That’s not personally directed at you, more the typically smug neck-beard who labels people sheeple and makes jokes about the MSM. I can’t think of anyone like that on here.

 

[Gronk]

No more dishonest than the Greens to be fair.

I would say both sides(a) are guilty of hyperbole more so than dishonesty.

(a) F**k you Bandy, I don’t care whether there are more than 2 sides. I’m only talking about two!

What do the greens say about climate change that is dishonest?

Tackling The Climate Crisis | Policies | The Australian Greens

greens.org.au

I woukd have thought that their policies are on point, however could probably be best decribed as unnecessarily or perhaps irresponsibly rushed.

 

[hineyrulz]

Regardless it conveyed the message that governments wanted to convey in order to deal with the situation, this is basically the "government lied to the people" , well f**k me sideways, this has never happened before.



This is subjective, what is an objective fact is that regardless of what is true or false, governments sought to control the messaging, again this is nothing new, it's been the case since the dawn of f**king civilisation.



Social media is a relatively new form of media, and it's reach is growing, so scale is relative to that. Would it surprise you that Twitter wasn't actively influenced by government in say the early to mid 2000's?

So yeah, that's a moot point.

Moot lol.

 

[Gary Gutful]

What do the greens say about climate change that is dishonest?

I would say both sides are guilty of hyperbole more so than dishonesty.

 

[hindy111]

That’s all fine. Just don’t pretend it’s something that’s never happened before and that only you and a select few of your mates understand it. Some of us understand it very well but have bigger issues to worry about.

P.S. That’s not personally directed at you, more the typically smug neck-beard who labels people sheeple and makes jokes about the MSM. I can’t think of anyone like that on here.

I'm suprised how many people think about these things. I think more about myself. Right now I am thinking about lunch and how nice the breeze is down by the water. And I might read my book a little later might think about a beer about 3pm.
Also thinking about sanding my door when I get back from holidays. And what things 2023 will bring me.
I feel like very few people on here even meditate which is a tad weird.

 

[hindy111]

Was hyperbole also a new word recently invented? Only seen it in 2022