Do You Feel Like Everything That You See on CBC and CNN is 100% Legitimate?

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

1. asking why the 5 or more ice ages and 5 or more melts in earth history are not discussed and are not compared.

2. Was that enough? If not , what is enough. What caused the preceding ice ages than the climate change melted?

3. I agree that many, if not most scientists have proof of climate change and the earth is getting hotter but it has in the past too.

4. all news sources seem to agree with climate change and some other events but where they differ is on political issues. Some report and some do not, some slant and others do not even mention.

 

 

 

 

 

1. They're not controversial or mysterious in climate science.  The controversial articles you see don't come from climate science, but outsiders with marginal involvement with science, promoted and puffed up by online magazines who want clicks.

2. No, there are very few fast events that have lingering questions about warming.

3. The reasons are largely known. But also, there's no proof, not will there ever be.  The reasons are that proof, ie. irrefutable evidence, can never be established in a real world with infinite unknowns.  For practical reasons, we have to make decisions based on risk.

4. Agreed.

[Zeitgeist]

The climate scare is based on conjectures about unverifiable human impacts.  Many of the policies that are being proposed or implemented to reduce human made climate change are damaging to humanity, especially the poor.  Climate policies should not involve increased taxes or substantial government spending.  The best way to fight climate change is through gradual changes in technology and building standards, as well as providing education and higher living standards to all, as that will naturally lead to smaller families.  Educated, middle class families tend to be smaller.  In any event our population will naturally flatten then decline when the Boomers have passed from about the 2050’s.  The current “climate crisis” is manufactured by governments and media.  Climate change has existed for millennia and led to migrations in the past.  More people are impacted now because there are far more people, especially in coastal areas, but our ability to adapt is better than ever.

Our bigger concern is inflation, energy security, and yes, poverty.  Keep the public health puritans out of office, because they’ll impose and maintain similar controls to the ones used to fight Covid to fighting “climate change.”   Canada is more or less screwed as a perpetual blue state, unfortunately.  It’s communism/fascism light for Canada until the self-preserving NDP-Liberal dictatorship is booted from office.  May never happen. 

Edited July 20, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

24 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. The climate scare is based on conjectures about unverifiable human impacts.   

1. I stopped after that.  

Once again for those hard of reading:

1. CO2 creates a greenhouse effect, which you can reproduce in a lab and which has occurred in the Earth's atmosphere in the past.

2. We are producing CO2 at an increasing amount, which correlates to our temperature increases.

3. There's no other explanation for the temperature increase that stands up to scrutiny.

[Zeitgeist]

31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I stopped after that.  

Once again for those hard of reading:

1. CO2 creates a greenhouse effect, which you can reproduce in a lab and which has occurred in the Earth's atmosphere in the past.

2. We are producing CO2 at an increasing amount, which correlates to our temperature increases.

3. There's no other explanation for the temperature increase that stands up to scrutiny.

With all due respect. I know a lot about this issue, have read studies, drank the Kool Aid years ago, etc.  While there are good reasons for concern about certain environmental changes that may or may not be substantially driven by human impacts — dying off of coral, loss of species (Sixth Extinction), rising sea levels due to thawing land ice cover — it’s hard to parse out how much of this change is due to natural cycles such as sunspot activity, orbital distance, volcanic activity, etc.  Acidity can kill underwater life, which is not necessarily climate change related.  There have been areas of the earth that have turned to desert and areas that have become flooded for millennia.  There is a high level of CO2 in the atmosphere relative to the rest of human history, but that CO2 is already there.  We can try to absorb it through massive tree-planting.  We can try to reflect heat back to space through whitewashing of civilization.  We can integrate green power into how we build.  What we must not do is make the energy that we need to manufacture goods, heat homes, and commute unaffordable to consumers.  Carbon taxes are a blow to living standards and the poor.  The fastest way to reducing climate change is reducing poverty and raising education levels.  That will naturally reduce population.  “Climate crisis” driven schemes that raise the cost of living and make energy less accessible are far more damaging to humanity than the impact of human made climate change, which we can only tackle over decades and centuries, not that we fully understand the extent of our human impact on climate change. I should add that I have been an environmental activist and investor in green power.  

Edited July 20, 2022 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

17 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. With all due respect. I know a lot about this issue, have read studies, drank the Kool Aid years ago, etc. 

2. volcanic activity, etc.   

1. Yeah me too.

2. Volcanic activity is measurable.

To say that the human impact is hard to determine means nothing in the face of what is happening.  And keep in mind that for years the so called skeptics told us warming wasn't happening.

 

As for policy, we can discuss it. Many of your points are valid, all I'm here to say is that we know as much as we could ever know that humans are causing this.

[ExFlyer]

22 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

With all due respect. I know a lot about this issue, have read studies, drank the Kool Aid years ago, etc.  While there are good reasons for concern about certain environmental changes that may or may not be substantially driven by human impacts — dying off of coral, loss of species (Sixth Extinction), rising sea levels due to thawing land ice cover — it’s hard to parse out how much of this change is due to natural cycles such as sunspot activity, orbital distance, volcanic activity, etc.  Acidity can kill underwater life, which is not necessarily climate change related.  There have been areas of the earth that have turned to desert and areas that have become flooded for millennia.  There is a high level of CO2 in the atmosphere relative to the rest of human history, but that CO2 is already there.  We can try to absorb it through massive tree-planting.  We can try to reflect heat back to space through whitewashing of civilization.  We can integrate green power into how we build.  What we must not do is make the energy that we need to manufacture goods, heat homes, and commute unaffordable to consumers.  Carbon taxes are a blow to living standards and the poor.  The fastest way to reducing climate change is reducing poverty and raising education levels.  That will naturally reduce population.  “Climate crisis” driven schemes that raise the cost of living and make energy less accessible are far more damaging to humanity than the impact of human made climate change, which we can only tackle over decades and centuries, not that we fully understand the extent of our human impact on climate change. I should add that I have been an environmental activist and investor in green power.  

I agree with most of what you say. It makes sense and is logical.

Like you, I am very aware and like you, I am concerned. I also agree that some of the earth heating (or maybe a lot of it) is a cyclical earth event. Trying to put blame one specific thing prevents or hinders us from correcting the whole problem.

[Michael Hardner]

9 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. I also agree that some of the earth heating (or maybe a lot of it) is a cyclical earth event. Trying to put blame one specific thing prevents or hinders us from correcting the whole problem.

1. As I said that is known.  The unknown is how much of our own CO2 production we can reduce.

[Yzermandius19]

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. As I said that is known.  The unknown is how much of our own CO2 production we can reduce.

historically humans have flourished during warm periods and struggled during cold periods

the idea that a warm period is cause for catastrophizing is silly

especially when humans are better at mitigating any negative effects than ever

the solution is not harm the economy, the better the economy does, the more that can be done mitigate to the negative effects

reducing CO2 emissions should not come at the expense of economic development

 

yet only the worst possible solutions are acceptable to the extremists

to them punishing humans is more important than helping the environment

hence why they only accept solutions that punish humans and scapegoat anyone who wants implement better solutions as climate change deniers

because it was never about the environment to them, that was just useful propaganda to sell their anti-human agenda

Edited July 20, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[sharkman]

50 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

With all due respect. I know a lot about this issue, have read studies, drank the Kool Aid years ago, etc.  While there are good reasons for concern about certain environmental changes that may or may not be substantially driven by human impacts — dying off of coral, loss of species (Sixth Extinction), rising sea levels due to thawing land ice cover — it’s hard to parse out how much of this change is due to natural cycles such as sunspot activity, orbital distance, volcanic activity, etc.  Acidity can kill underwater life, which is not necessarily climate change related.  There have been areas of the earth that have turned to desert and areas that have become flooded for millennia.  There is a high level of CO2 in the atmosphere relative to the rest of human history, but that CO2 is already there.  We can try to absorb it through massive tree-planting.  We can try to reflect heat back to space through whitewashing of civilization.  We can integrate green power into how we build.  What we must not do is make the energy that we need to manufacture goods, heat homes, and commute unaffordable to consumers.  Carbon taxes are a blow to living standards and the poor.  The fastest way to reducing climate change is reducing poverty and raising education levels.  That will naturally reduce population.  “Climate crisis” driven schemes that raise the cost of living and make energy less accessible are far more damaging to humanity than the impact of human made climate change, which we can only tackle over decades and centuries, not that we fully understand the extent of our human impact on climate change. I should add that I have been an environmental activist and investor in green power.  

That’s all well and good, but one day you’ll realize that you can’t reason with people who are in a climate cult…

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, sharkman said:

That’s all well and good, but one day you’ll realize that you can’t reason with people who are in a climate cult…

it's an anti-human cult, Malthusian AF

the climate is just the cover to boost PR

for something that is unsellable if they call it what it truly is

this is how they sell naive people with good intentions, who actually want to help the environment, on their horrific agenda

Edited July 20, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[ExFlyer]

24 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. As I said that is known.  The unknown is how much of our own CO2 production we can reduce.

I get what you are saying but, if history is known and the unknown is... well,  unknown, then perhaps the actual culprits should pay the price and not us minor players?

That is all other are saying. Why should I pay the penalty for other actions? If I am destined to pay penalties, then make the m proportional.

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. perhaps the actual culprits should pay the price and not us minor players?

Others are saying that also.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, sharkman said:

What I mean is, take the gay pride thing.  The local media is already promoting the upcoming Pride parade event(in the middle of news stories) in Vancouver, and it’s two weeks away.  They didn’t even do that for Canada day.

This is a bit different than the thread direction, but just as important, IMV.  Canadian media show great bias in what they cover or report on, and how they cover it.

Any of the above items I quoted above get a left wing bias.  It actually becomes fake news right before your eyes.

What exactly was faked? You're not making any sense whatsoever.

It's strictly your own mind that seems to be muddling your thinking here. You're not even trying to tell up from down.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, sharkman said:

What I mean is, take the gay pride thing.  The local media is already promoting the upcoming Pride parade event(in the middle of news stories) in Vancouver, and it’s two weeks away.  They didn’t even do that for Canada day.

This is a bit different than the thread direction, but just as important, IMV.  Canadian media show great bias in what they cover or report on, and how they cover it.

Any of the above items I quoted above get a left wing bias.  It actually becomes fake news right before your eyes.

What fakery are you talking about with regards to Pride Day and Canada Day precisely?  Without an answer your post is simply an example of putting your mouth in gear before engaging your mind.  The only fakery going on here is that you're thinking.

Take the threat title...Do you feel like everything that you see is legitimate or fake as the case may be.  The more critical question you should be asking, before putting your mouth in gear, is do you actually know that everything you see is fake? If yes you should be able to point out exactly where and what it is to others.

Edited July 20, 2022 by eyeball

[sharkman]

37 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What fakery are you talking about with regards to Pride Day and Canada Day precisely?  Without an answer your post is simply an example of putting your mouth in gear before engaging your mind.  The only fakery going on here is that you're thinking.

Take the threat title...Do you feel like everything that you see is legitimate or fake as the case may be.  The more critical question you should be asking, before putting your mouth in gear, is do you actually know that everything you see is fake? If yes you should be able to point out exactly where and what it is to others.

If you can’t comprehend what I’m saying, then the post is not for you.

The word “fake”, in relation to news, is well understood by those on the right.  It’s a generic description that means untrue, inaccurate and or greatly biased, when spoken by a Trump supporter.  It doesn’t mean that everything I see I believe to be fake  -  untrue.

You are being far too left brained in this instance.  I hope you know what that means.  

So when I refer to our local media hyping a controversial event 2 weeks in advance(gay pride), and by comparison would not hype Canada Day, as fake news, it means the following.  They are being biased.  

Edited July 20, 2022 by sharkman

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, sharkman said:

The word “fake”, in relation to news, is well understood by those on the right.  It’s a generic description that means untrue, inaccurate and or greatly biased, when spoken by a Trump supporter.  It doesn’t mean that everything I see I believe to be fake.

You are being far too left brained in this instance.  I hope you know what that means.

The word fake in relation to contemporary right wingers is a meme that's more like an article of faith.  Some people have beliefs and some beliefs have people, you're in the latter category.

[sharkman]

Just now, eyeball said:

The word fake in relation to contemporary right wingers is a meme that's more like an article of faith.  Some people have beliefs and some beliefs have people, you're in the latter category.

That's a typical response from the left.  Meanwhile, the left has the cult of climate, and more recently the cult of sex change.  No one is as obsessed with sex as the left, which they try to hide by accusing their enemy(the right) of obsession...

And since the media is by and large left of center, the fact that they inject their biases and cultish beliefs into their stories should come as no surprise.  The decades of leftwing MSM brainwashing of the public has greatly reduced  freedom in Canada.   I may one day get arrested or have my bank accounts frozen for posts such as this.  Digital currency, our Federal government wants to bring it in.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

That's a typical response from the left.

What is it that's typical about it? You don't think it's possible for people to be caught in the grip of a belief or that right wingers are somehow immune to that?

[WestCanMan]

15 hours ago, eyeball said:

A person with integrity would acknowledge that when someone tells you they question these all the time it clearly means everything.

You say that you question these news sources but I've never seen you stray from the script at all. You rabidly defend every CTV propaganda piece that comes out, and when it's proven to be BS you never own it. 

You're still clinging to vax efficacy and supporting their campaign to force everyone to take the Pflacebo. 

There's not a shred of real world data that shows we need to pseudovax children or healthy young adults. There's very real proof that it's harmful to those people. Yet you choose to ignore the evidence and go along with the campaign. You're like that on every story that comes out eyeball.

I asked you if you can name a specific time that you felt like you were being lied to or misled and you answered in general terms about what a critical thinker you are lol. 

Stop thinking in terms of "They gave me all the accurate information and I'm coming to the same conclusions as they're telling me to." Think in terms of "Theses people will only tell me part of the story because they always have an agenda."

Ask yourself things like "Is it really no big deal that a lot of healthy young women stopped having their period? Why are so many young people having strokes now? Is it really no big deal that thousands of young healthy men who weren't at any risk from covid got myocarditis? (Do you even know how serious myocarditis is, or what the long-term prognosis is?)"

Ask yourself why CTV and CBC, who spend so much time looking for covid-related stories to talk about, NEVER talk about side-effects or the number of "fully-protected" people who apparently weren't protected at all.

Do you ever ask yourself those questions, eyeball? Do ya? The answer's no, because if you did then you wouldn't be such a rabid vax-Nazi. 

Quote

If you feel the need to weasel around telling people they're outright lying to you it's because on some level you realize you'd need to supply evidence of the lie.

I'm not a leftist, so I don't call people names just because it fits my narrative. I call people liars when they're lying AND I can provide proof of it, which I do.

Quote

Until you come up with something more tangible than the hooey mucking up your thinking all you come off looking like is a douchebag.

That's all you have is hooey, eyeball. You live and breathe it.

You were asked to talk about a time when you felt like the MSM was being dishonest and you just said that you're a critical thinker. FYI that's not an answer to that question, it's hooey. 

How about saying something like "I'm a critical thinker but they're always 100% right" or "I'm a critical thinker and I wasn't happy about the fact that when they covered the _______ story they seemed to skip a lot of important details and pushed a false narrative."

Take a stand. Be a man. Have an actual opinion where you say something specific and meaningful instead of speaking in general terms about how awesome you are and how inferior other people are. FYI anyone can say "I'm awesome and you suck", but you've never been in a position to back that statement up. You can just repeat it, ad nauseam, while looking stupid. 

[Yzermandius19]

28 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What is it that's typical about it? You don't think it's possible for people to be caught in the grip of a belief or that right wingers are somehow immune to that?

righties aren't immune

but lefties are particularly susceptible and project that susceptibility on the right

hence typical 

Edited July 20, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

You say that you question these news sources but I've never seen you stray from the script at all. 

That's simply because you're a moron.

[eyeball]

57 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

righties aren't immune

but lefties are particularly susceptible and project that susceptibility on the right

hence typical 

Why is it so hard to simply say I'm full of shit and leave it at that? Instead you feel some compulsion to play rubber and glue. Do you think you're being more grown up or something when you do that?

[Yzermandius19]

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Why is it so hard to simply say I'm full of shit and leave it at that? Instead you feel some compulsion to play rubber and glue. Do you think you're being more grown up or something when you do that?

because you fling your shit on others

act like you never took a shit

and act like they shat themselves

you aren't fooling anyone that you aren't guilty

by accusing others of guilt first

he who smelt it dealt it

saying it first doesn't mean shit

projection isn't a shield you can hide behind

Edited July 20, 2022 by Yzermandius19

[WestCanMan]

22 minutes ago, eyeball said:

That's simply because you're a moron.

There you go again, replying to accurate comments and criticisms with a snotty insult.

Again, can you name a specific story that you saw on CTV, CBC or CNN which you felt was disinformation or lacked integrity in a serious way?

[Yzermandius19]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

There you go again, replying to accurate comments and criticisms with a snotty insult.

Again, can you name a specific story that you saw on CTV, CBC or CNN which you felt was disinformation or lacked integrity in a serious way?

obvious sign of cognitive dissonance

feigning like they want a good faith debate

then going ad hominem once it's clear they are in over their head