Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Huffington Post wants the media to report responsibly on global warming -- "responsibly" meaning, of course, "please ignore any detractors no matter how well informed or qualified they are"   (news.yahoo.com) divider line
552
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

5262 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 12 Apr 2007 at 7:15 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



552 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Newest | Show all

 
albo
2007-04-12 3:41:52 PM  
So this begs the question, why didn't Joe check into any of this to ensure that he wasn't using unsubstantiated and flawed material to attempt to refute the consensus of the most credible scientific study on the subject in the world?

not only does the wife of an actor/producer not understand that in science no fact or theory is ever safe from being challenged, she doesn't know how to use "beg the question" correctly.
 
SSP
2007-04-12 3:50:33 PM  
not only does the wife of an actor/producer not understand that in science no fact or theory is ever safe from being challenged, she doesn't know how to use "beg the question" correctly.

Yes, I question the Theory of Gravity each and every day. You do know its a theory do you not?
 
Mordant
2007-04-12 3:53:53 PM  
no matter how well-informed or qualified they are

Excellent, that made my day.
 
albo
2007-04-12 3:57:10 PM  
Yes, I question the Theory of Gravity each and every day

it could be because we live in/on a brane
 
SpaceButler
2007-04-12 3:58:31 PM  
albo: not only does the wife of an actor/producer not understand that in science no fact or theory is ever safe from being challenged, she doesn't know how to use "beg the question" correctly.

Well, she didn't say the theory couldn't be challenged, just that it shouldn't be challenged with "unsubstantiated and flawed material", which seems fairly reasonable.
 
SSP
2007-04-12 3:59:54 PM  
2007-04-12 03:53:53 PM Mordant

no matter how well-informed or qualified they are

Excellent, that made my day.

Does a big paycheck from Big Oil make them more well-informed or qualified?
 
Ryan2065
2007-04-12 4:01:52 PM  
SSP Yes, I question the Theory of Gravity each and every day. You do know its a theory do you not?

Sure you can question the theory of gravity... You just need to bring alot of scientific research with you when you question it.
 
Snarfangel
2007-04-12 4:03:53 PM  
albo
>>Yes, I question the Theory of Gravity each and every day

it could be because we live in/on a brane

Having Einstein holding a sign that says "Get a brane, morans" would be a cool Photoshop.
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-04-12 4:04:11 PM  
albo: unsubstantiated and flawed material facts I don't like

Fixed that for ya. Well, for her, I mean.
 
Angry Drunk Bureaucrat [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2007-04-12 4:04:20 PM  
albo: it could be because we live in/on a brane

Don't you start with that 21 dimension universe shiat, son. In my day, we had 10 dimensions and we liked it.
 
albo
2007-04-12 4:04:23 PM  
Does a big paycheck from Big Oil make them more well-informed or qualified?

the bulk of each side of global warming is politically-agenda driven. that's what sucks about the whole debate.

but in any event, science stands on its own. if the study can be reproduced by others and holds up, it doesn't matter who paid for it.
 
unemployed_philosopher
2007-04-12 4:06:29 PM  
albo: she doesn't know how to use "beg the question" correctly.

There are two ways to use the phrase 'begging the question'. One of them is the informal fallacy of assuming the statement you're trying to prove. The other is the rhetorical device of anthropomorphization: such-and-so state of affairs begs to be questioned in a certain way.

It's unfortunate, but the usage here is a perfectly cromulent one of the latter type.
 
albo
2007-04-12 4:08:49 PM  
It's unfortunate, but the usage here is a perfectly cromulent one of the latter type.

she's using it as a synonym for "raises the question," which is not cromulent to me as long as i draw breath on this brane.
 
TheConvincingSavant
2007-04-12 4:10:24 PM  
The left cannot deal with foreign ideas. Thats why they can't hack it on radio. It's why they won't debate on Fox News. It's why Huffington wants a biased media.

The best argument the left has is that there is no argument. There is no argument on global warming. If you disagree, then you're an idiot.

Where did all the real liberals go?
 
Sensei Can You See [TotalFark]
2007-04-12 4:10:53 PM  
unemployed_philosopher: It's unfortunate, but the usage here is a perfectly cromulent one of the latter type.

Not according to most competent editors and journalists:

http://nstockdale.blogspot.com/2005/03/begs-question.html (pops)
 
unemployed_philosopher
2007-04-12 4:13:59 PM  
albo: she's using it as a synonym for "raises the question," which is not cromulent to me as long as i draw breath on this brane.

Shouldn't that be 'in' this brane? I've always disliked 'brane' as a descriptor anyway since it (to my ear) implies two-dimensionality, or near enough as makes no nevermind.

And, unfortunately, whether you like her usage or not, it's acceptable. I don't like it either, but there you go.
 
jimmyhaha
2007-04-12 4:15:29 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: The best argument the left has is that there is no argument. T

That and millions of pages of valid, peer-reviewed scientific studies.
 
Snarfangel
2007-04-12 4:15:32 PM  
unemployed_philosopher
There are two ways to use the phrase 'begging the question'. One of them is the informal fallacy of assuming the statement you're trying to prove. The other is the rhetorical device of anthropomorphization: such-and-so state of affairs begs to be questioned in a certain way.

It's unfortunate, but the usage here is a perfectly cromulent one of the latter type.

So basically, there is the Vulcan version, and the Cromulen one.
 
albo
2007-04-12 4:16:15 PM  
Shouldn't that be 'in' this brane? I've always disliked 'brane' as a descriptor anyway since it (to my ear) implies two-dimensionality, or near enough as makes no nevermind.

not sure. i'm just a civilian, and still in the "wrap-your-head-around-the-basic-concept" stage of m-theory
 
unemployed_philosopher
2007-04-12 4:16:23 PM  
MyNameIsNotMervGriffin: Not according to most competent editors and journalists:

Journalists have no business engaging in prescriptive grammar. And you'll note that the end of the post you linked supports my claim: it is an accepted usage, though many people don't like it.
 
SSP
2007-04-12 4:16:54 PM  
2007-04-12 04:10:24 PM TheConvincingSavant

The best argument the left has is that there is no argument. There is no argument on global warming. If you disagree, then you're an idiot.

Where did all the real liberals go?

They are too busy studying the scientific evidence and trying to educate people that are neither convincing or savants....
 
Action Replay Nick
2007-04-12 4:17:17 PM  
Global warming is junk science. Every time libtards bring up this issue, I intentionally pollute more just to prove them wrong. I go sit in my car listening to music while the engine idles, and LOOK! We're still here! The earth didn't blow up and we're getting SNOWSTORMS in APRIL.

Global warming... pfffttt... something invented by liberals and secularist scientists to occupy their time since they don't go to church or have traditional American family lifestyles that require time and dedication.
 
Hobodeluxe
2007-04-12 4:17:52 PM  
TheUnconvincingIdiot: The left cannot deal with foreign ideas. Thats why they can't hack it on radio. It's why they won't debate on Fox News. It's why Huffington wants a biased media.

The best argument the left has is that there is no argument. There is no argument on global warming. If you disagree, then you're an idiot.

Where did all the real liberals go?

I think I'll go with the 99.9% of scientists that aren't on the payroll of big oil. Their argument makes much more sense than your ad hominem.

And if you'll take off the blinders you'll see the real liberals. I just wonder where all the real conservatives are keeping their balls? They seem to be awfully quiet about the hijacking of their party.
 
unemployed_philosopher
2007-04-12 4:18:25 PM  
albo: not sure. i'm just a civilian, and still in the "wrap-your-head-around-the-basic-concept" stage of m-theory

Oh. Well, it gets way more fun. I recommend 45cc bourbon p.r.n. to cope with the headache you'll walk out with.
 
unemployed_philosopher
2007-04-12 4:19:53 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: The left cannot deal with foreign ideas. Thats why they can't hack it on radio. It's why they won't debate on Fox News

You know what the best thing is? There are some people who actually believe that these claims are true.
 
Mordant
2007-04-12 4:19:58 PM  
Ooohh... burrrrnnnnnnn. Yep, I'm not a "real liberal".


Hell, I'll admit it.
 
SSP
2007-04-12 4:26:07 PM  
[image from img76.imageshack.us too old to be available]

What if a scientist on a remote island in Hawaii takes carbon dioxide concentration measurements of the air for many decades and it looks something like the above. And said scientist knows that carbon dioxide has a higher heat capacity than the air around it. Hmmm..thats interesting...
 
TheConvincingSavant
2007-04-12 4:32:11 PM  
There can be no opposing views.

See what I mean? If you hold a different view, you're an idiot, paid by big oil, delusional, wearing blinders, etc.

It is exactly as I've stated above. They embrace the non-argument.

No one here filled with anger for new ideas even cares about the evidence to the contrary. After all, the scientist who provide it are all paid by big oil. All of them. Every single one.

There can be no opposing views.
 
jimmyhaha
2007-04-12 4:32:53 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: Where did all the real liberals go?

You put them on your ignore list.
 
unemployed_philosopher
2007-04-12 4:33:57 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: There can be no opposing views.

[...]

There can be no opposing views.

I'm sorry. I don't speak your crazy moon-language. Could you translate this into English, please?
 
SSP
2007-04-12 4:39:01 PM  
Of course you can have an opposing view...but you run the risk of getting laughed at like those tinfoil hatters who say we faked the moon landing
 
Blues_X
2007-04-12 4:41:08 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: If you hold a different view, you're an idiot, paid by big oil, delusional, wearing blinders, etc.


Yes, that is what happens when you're wrong.

Also, when your point-man is Jim Inhofe, this is a bad sign.

And third, if you don't believe any "liberals", what about ConocoPhilips (pops)?
 
ComicBookGuy
2007-04-12 4:44:23 PM  
jimmyhaha: TheConvincingSavant: The best argument the left has is that there is no argument. T

That and millions of pages of valid, peer-reviewed scientific studies.

Can you say "PWNED"? I knew you could!! :D
 
binnster
2007-04-12 4:50:13 PM  
TheConvincingSavant

There can be no opposing views.

Of course there can, but only one can be right. I'd put my money on the side with most scientists researching the matter, personally.


No one here filled with anger for new ideas even cares about the evidence to the contrary.

What evidence to the contrary is there? I care enough to hear it.
 
brap [TotalFark]
2007-04-12 4:52:42 PM  
A hat of naysayer is a beret.

[image from myimagebuddy.com too old to be available]

No it isn't.

Christ, Pascal, and you wonder why you never get invites anymore. One of these days you're going to go to far and someone will beat the crepe out of you.
 
Snarfangel
2007-04-12 4:57:26 PM  
TheConvincingSavant: The best argument the left has is that there is no argument. T

jimmyhaha: That and millions of pages of valid, peer-reviewed scientific studies.

That's easy to do if you write big enough.

/"To quote page five of my thesis, 'The'."
//I kid
 
colovion
2007-04-12 4:57:55 PM  
The brain in Blian falls bainly on the brane.
 
rrtt22
2007-04-12 5:11:17 PM  
Samething happened here locally the global warming people avoided all debate no matter how qualified. If it is such a slam dunk then why is there so much debate avoidance?
 
Marcus Aurelius [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2007-04-12 5:18:03 PM  
[image from whyfiles.org too old to be available]
 
sweddjen
2007-04-12 5:29:47 PM  
Action Replay Nick: Global warming is junk science. Every time libtards bring up this issue, I intentionally pollute more just to prove them wrong.

Nice troll but this illustrates something I don't get.

What makes global warming part of some "libtard" agenda? Aren't environment concerns everyone's concerns? Why must it be political?

Do conservatives who deny the truth about global warming just really really love the fossil fuel industries? Why is it "conservative" to stick your head in the sand otherwise? It isn't like every person who cares about the environment is a patchouli drenched hippy. (Or is that what conservatives think, so they just knee-jerk disagree?)
 
Snarfangel
2007-04-12 5:30:20 PM  
Marcus Aurelius, I have to admit, I hate drama-enhanced graphs like that. The x-axis is set to 260 PPM rather than 0 and left unlabeled, and while I won't ask for the temperature to be placed on an absolute scale, it makes less than a degree look like a runaway greenhouse effect.

I guess it's better than plotting the temperature increase from the last ice age, though.
 
Marcus Aurelius [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2007-04-12 5:32:34 PM  
Snarfangel

It's snazzier than the old stand-by.
[image from dcn.davis.ca.us too old to be available]

I'd have gone with it if I'd expected to meet a great mind such as yourself in this thread.
 
sweddjen
2007-04-12 5:32:37 PM  
environmental*
 
Snarfangel
2007-04-12 6:14:02 PM  
Marcus Aurelius
Snarfangel
It's snazzier than the old stand-by.

I actually like that graph better, though the x-axis still looks like it's about 100 PPM. At least you get a feel for how the concentration cycles, and it makes the CO2 graph sufficiently dramatic. (BTW, I'm not arguing against global warming, I'm just suspicious of certain types of graphs).

I'd have gone with it if I'd expected to meet a great mind such as yourself in this thread.

The anthropogenic sarcasm concentration is through the roof in this sentence. :D
 
Gahbrone
2007-04-12 6:17:00 PM  
According to your graph, CO2 peaks have FOLLOWED temperature.
 
Gahbrone
2007-04-12 6:24:56 PM  
According to this graph, CO2 FOLLOWS temperature. EVERY temperature peak comes BEFORE the CO2 peak.

Indeed, temperatures only start to DECREASE AFTER CO2 levels peak
[image from dcn.davis.ca.us too old to be available]
 
Howie_Feltersnatch
2007-04-12 6:26:50 PM  
/not submitter
 
Gahbrone
2007-04-12 6:29:50 PM  
also, explain to me how temperature aren't even at historic highs?
 
Gahbrone
2007-04-12 6:31:48 PM  
I'm gonna wait here for someone to have to disprove their own data.
 
Descartes
2007-04-12 7:18:06 PM  
Damn them ancient peoples and their infernal combustion engines!
 
Displayed 50 of 552 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

Can't get enough Fark in your life? Try

TotalFark

More threads. More community. More Farking.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.