Another blow for freedom of speech in Canada

[Legato]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Thanks for the metaphor.

Not sure how I'm spinning when I'm asking you mostly about your rating scale for Psychologists, and how you're looking at this overall... But ok.

Who's on first.

[Michael Hardner]

32 minutes ago, Legato said:

Who's on first.

I'm so bored I responded to this.

[blackbird]

Just came across another article which says Jordan Peterson was targeted by the College of Psychologists of Ontario (CPO) for his views on climate change podcast, among other things, which had nothing to do with the psychology profession.

"The CPO reprimanded Peterson for, among other things, remarks he made on a Joe Rogan podcast concerning climate-change policy , a subject that bears no relationship to his clinical practice as a psychologist."

Opinion: Climate censorship is worse than you think (msn.com)

Edited September 13, 2023 by blackbird

[Michael Hardner]

25 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Just came across another article which says Jordan Peterson was targeted by the College of Psychologists of Ontario (CPO) for his views on climate change podcast, among other things, which had nothing to do with the psychology profession.

"The CPO reprimanded Peterson for, among other things, remarks he made on a Joe Rogan podcast concerning climate-change policy , a subject that bears no relationship to his clinical practice as a psychologist."

Opinion: Climate censorship is worse than you think (msn.com)

Although I think Peterson's opinions on Climate are misinformed to the level of crackpot, and his arrogance and misguidedness reveal hypocrisy, lack of professionalism and such... I don't think opinions on Climate Change themselves are worthy of sanction by the professional body of Psychologists.

I realize I have sided against Peterson on this issue in the past but on the Climate point the College has overreached IMO.

[WestCanMan]

42 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Although I think Peterson's opinions on Climate are misinformed to the level of crackpot, and his arrogance and misguidedness reveal hypocrisy, lack of professionalism and such... I don't think opinions on Climate Change themselves are worthy of sanction by the professional body of Psychologists.

I realize I have sided against Peterson on this issue in the past but on the Climate point the College has overreached IMO.

Peterson should be allowed to say the same things about climate change that actual climatologists are saying. What's wrong with citing the opinions of some of the world's foremost scientists?

Honestly, the problem is that there's no money in the science of climatology. They're like the retarded cousins of the world of science and medicine and no one gives crap about them until they throw out a doomsday prediction. Their litany of dire predictions of ice ages, nitrogen buildup, super hurricanes, global flooding etc all went largely ignored until their field became highly politicized.

Now the only way to get paid is to churn out weather maps where +30° on July 17th in Mesa Arizona is fiery red. "Like, OMG Brittany, if that's not a sign of the heatpocalypse I dunno what is!"

[Michael Hardner]

29 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. Peterson should be allowed to say the same things about climate change that actual climatologists are saying. What's wrong with citing the opinions of some of the world's foremost scientists?

2. Honestly, the problem is that there's no money in the science of climatology.  

3. Now the only way to get paid is to churn out weather maps where +30° on July 17th in Mesa Arizona is fiery red. "Like, OMG Brittany, if that's not a sign of the heatpocalypse I dunno what is!"

1. Well didn't I just say that ?  Also - NO leading climatologist doubts human-caused climate change, not sure where you go there.

2. Lots of money for fake scientists and deniers though.

3. That's not climatology that's the weather channel.  Please put your rage in the correct 'rage box'

[TreeBeard]

On 9/13/2023 at 6:48 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Although I think Peterson's opinions on Climate are misinformed to the level of crackpot, and his arrogance and misguidedness reveal hypocrisy, lack of professionalism and such... I don't think opinions on Climate Change themselves are worthy of sanction by the professional body of Psychologists.

I realize I have sided against Peterson on this issue in the past but on the Climate point the College has overreached IMO.

If their code of conduct states they shouldn’t spread anti-science lies, why shouldn’t he be sanctioned?

Edited September 16, 2023 by TreeBeard

[Zeitgeist]

Claiming to know the extent of human made climate change is a fool’s errand, believed by fools.  

[TreeBeard]

8 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Claiming to know the extent of human made climate change is a fool’s errand, believed by fools.  

What are you using to refute the science and to know more than the experts?  Feelings?

[Zeitgeist]

47 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

What are you using to refute the science and to know more than the experts?  Feelings?

Yawn.  It’s another Red Menace.  Always some crisis to control the peasants and shake them down for money.  If it means that much to you, you should donate large sums to the cause. Canadians are becoming such soft touches. I have some property in Tuktoyuktuk if you’re interested.  I can promise it will stay cold there until you die.  

[Michael Hardner]

5 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

If their code of conduct states they shouldn’t spread anti-science lies, why shouldn’t he be sanctioned?

I guess we would have to see the code.  I imagined that the provisions were broader than that.

[TreeBeard]

11 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Yawn.  It’s another Red Menace.  Always some crisis to control the peasants and shake them down for money.  If it means that much to you, you should donate large sums to the cause. Canadians are becoming such soft touches. I have some property in Tuktoyuktuk if you’re interested.  I can promise it will stay cold there until you die.  

So, you’re relying on your feelings to inform you when you don’t like what science says…. 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, TreeBeard said:

So, you’re relying on your feelings to inform you when you don’t like what science says…. 

The science doesn't say what you think it says.  And you don't say what the science says.

If you think the science or facts support a carbon tax in the slightest - then it is you who lies to yourself despite the science, not others.  MUH FEELS!!!!

[Zeitgeist]

14 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

So, you’re relying on your feelings to inform you when you don’t like what science says…. 

I actually know a bit about climate change. If you think that there’s a single settled narrative on the impact of human behaviour on climate change and what to do about it, that tells me all I need to know about your depth of knowledge of the topic.

I have a solar panel system and fought to establish the Greenbelt and eliminate coal power generation through news articles, letters to politicians, and protests.  I put my time and money where my mouth is.  How about you?

Edited September 16, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 

I have a solar system  

?

[Zeitgeist]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

?

To own one is to know how little energy it provides and how expensive it is.  

[CdnFox]

57 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

To own one is to know how little energy it provides and how expensive it is.  

You phrased it poorly -  to be honest when you said you own a solar system it sounded like you thought the planets revolved around you. Even i didn't immediately realize you meant you had a solar POWER system