Where Do We Get Our News And Why Does It Matter?

[LouC]

Too many people read their favorite news source, and don't go down the rabbit hole to look at the original repeated data to see if there is misrepresentation, or biased opinion spin. They gleefully get fooled, as Mark Twain wrote in 1906 "How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!'

Of course, similar ideas have been professed for hundreds of years

Never ending quest!

 

[wist43]

I don't have to, every one of his points have been refuted by professional epidemiologists. He is a contrarian when it comes to infectious disease, and 900K dead in the usa refute what he says. The fact he claimed we would have natural herd immunity by April 2021 shows he's wrong.

He made no such claim - yet that is what you think you read??

Quote his article where he said that.

So, what you wrote there was an outright lie, no??

Why can't you have an honest conversation with someone you think you disagree with??

-----------------------------

Too many people read their favorite news source, and don't go down the rabbit hole to look at the original repeated data to see if there is misrepresentation, or biased opinion spin. They gleefully get fooled, as Mark Twain wrote in 1906 "How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!'

Of course, similar ideas have been professed for hundreds of years

It is easy to deceive the masses - you demonstrated that above.

Now why would someone who professes to hear and speak truth, lie to prove his point??

You're indoctrinated - you don't process information honestly (like all liberals); rather, you seek out confirmation bias and disparage anything, including inconvenient facts, that challenges or refutes your biased view.

That is the very definition of being intellectually dishonest.

 

[RAMOSS]

So, what you wrote there was an outright lie, no??

Why can't you have an honest conversation with someone you think you disagree with??

-----------------------------



It is easy to deceive the masses - you demonstrated that above.

Now why would someone who professes to hear and speak truth, lie to prove his point??

You're indoctrinated - you don't process information honestly (like all liberals); rather, you seek out confirmation bias and disparage anything, including inconvenient facts, that challenges or refutes your biased view.

That is the very definition of being intellectually dishonest.

Funny how often people who use 'alternate' news sources and conspiracy theories insist that people who are skeptical about their claims are 'indoctrination'

 

[lwf]

Never ending quest!

Only for those who care about the truth. For too many, there is no quest. There is only the word of an authority they have decided to trust.

 

[wist43]

^ Wrong-libertarianism.

What does the fraud of AGW have to do with libertarianism??

The answer is nothing - so do you have a point??

The subject of climate and weather is based on science - which is why it is easy to demonstrate why the scaremongering of AGW is a fraud.

The real problem isn't the climate science - the real problem is the science of mass psychology which had been honed to devastating effect in indoctrinating the masses to such a degree that they are programmed to have emotional and visceral reactions to anything that challenges their indoctrination. They will rage with anger and never even consider looking at the actual science or another viewpoint.

That's the behavior of someone who is ensnared in a cult.

Here is the actual science BTW, don't break your computer or set yourself on fire

 

[wist43]

Funny how often people who use 'alternate' news sources and conspiracy theories insist that people who are skeptical about their claims are 'indoctrination'

So why did you lie??

You're just proving my point.

Answer the question, why did you lie??

 

[RAMOSS]

So why did you lie??

You're just proving my point.

Answer the question, why did you lie??

Your misinterpretation is not my lying.

 

[wist43]

Your misinterpretation is not my lying.

Lol... this is fun

So, here is exactly what he wrote...

Marty Makary, M.D., is a professor of surgery and health policy at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

Ignoring natural immunity

Ironically, when public health officials insisted that those who had natural immunity be fired for not being vaccinated, they fired those least likely to spread the infection in the workplace. Drs. Fauci and Rochelle Walensky never talked about natural immunity and instead created the imprecise construct of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. In reality, most unvaccinated Americans have antibodies that neutralized the virus, but they are antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Eventually the data came in. Natural immunity was 2.8 times better in preventing hospitalization than vaccinated immunity and having both meant you had the same protection as natural immunity alone.

-------------------------------

And here is exactly what you said he wrote,

The fact he claimed we would have natural herd immunity by April 2021 shows he's wrong.

---------------------

So, my indoctrinated friend - did he say what you said he said??

The answer is no??

So, why did you lie?? Just admit you're wrong... you liberals are something else

 

[Antiwar]

What does the fraud of AGW have to do with libertarianism??

The answer is nothing - so do you have a point??

The subject of climate and weather is based on science - which is why it is easy to demonstrate why the scaremongering of AGW is a fraud.

The real problem isn't the climate science - the real problem is the science of mass psychology which had been honed to devastating effect in indoctrinating the masses to such a degree that they are programmed to have emotional and visceral reactions to anything that challenges their indoctrination. They will rage with anger and never even consider looking at the actual science or another viewpoint.

That's the behavior of someone who is ensnared in a cult.

Here is the actual science BTW, don't break your computer or set yourself on fire

A Cato Institute, Koch brothers right-libertarian is the holder of "the real science." Too funny.

 

[wist43]

A Cato Institute, Koch brothers right-libertarian is the holder of "the real science." Too funny.

Again, no science, no facts, just nonsense.

Leftists are unthinking automatons - it's sad.

 

[Antiwar]

Again, no science, no facts, just nonsense.

Leftists are unthinking automatons - it's sad.

The fact is that humans burn boatloads of fossil fuels every day, literally pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

You've found a right-libertarian that's a scientist and you've glommed onto his "the climate models are wrong" notion and you literally said that's "the actual science." Then you have the nerve to tell me I'm doing exactly what you did.

 

[wist43]

The fact is that humans burn boatloads of fossil fuels every day, literally pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

You've found a right-libertarian that's a scientist and you've glommed onto his "the climate models are wrong" notion and you literally said that's "the actual science." Then you have the nerve to tell me I'm doing exactly what you did.

Last time I checked, MIT was an elite scientific institution.

That said, we both know you didn't watch Lindzen's presentation - that would likely make your brain explode

As for the climate models - they are wrong. No honest person can deny that - but of course liberals aren't honest

 

[wist43]

The fact is that humans burn boatloads of fossil fuels every day, literally pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

You've found a right-libertarian that's a scientist and you've glommed onto his "the climate models are wrong" notion and you literally said that's "the actual science." Then you have the nerve to tell me I'm doing exactly what you did.

Ever watch the IQ^2 debates??

You should - they're very interesting, regardless of topic; and, I can assure you most of those folks are hard left.

Guess what happened when they put on an actual debate between prominent scientists arguing from both sides of the climate fence??

Not a single person flipped from "skeptic" to believer. I forget what the exact percentages were, but pre-debate well over half believed the propaganda lies were true; afterward, the numbers were reversed.

The reason climate hustlers won't debate the real scientists is they don't have the scientific facts on their side.

So they have to resort to fraud (caught lying many times - including "Climategate") and propaganda.

Wake up, you're indoctrinated.

 

[Antiwar]

Last time I checked, MIT was an elite scientific institution.

That said, we both know you didn't watch Lindzen's presentation - that would likely make your brain explode

As for the climate models - they are wrong. No honest person can deny that - but of course liberals aren't honest

Putting "epic fail" on a chart is the pinnacle of science. Epic, dood.

 

[wist43]

Putting "epic fail" on a chart is the pinnacle of science. Epic, dood.

Here is the actual IQ^2 debate... results are screenshot at very end.

 

[wist43]

Putting "epic fail" on a chart is the pinnacle of science. Epic, dood.

It was more fun than posting this

 

[wist43]

Putting "epic fail" on a chart is the pinnacle of science. Epic, dood.

I have a B.S. in chemistry - I understand the science better than most.

Of my fellow scientists, and I know many, I don't know any that believe AGW is going to be a "run away" problem.

You're being lied to.

 

[wist43]

Putting "epic fail" on a chart is the pinnacle of science. Epic, dood.

Here's a fun fact - of all the computer models, the most accurate one is the Russian model.

The reason it is more accurate than the others is because they are the only ones that don't have CO2 as a driver of climate and temperature.

That's not going to stop the agenda driven frauds though - too much money and prestige at stake.

 

[LouC]

Only for those who care about the truth. For too many, there is no quest. There is only the word of an authority they have decided to trust.

 

[LouC]

Again, no science, no facts, just nonsense.

Leftists are unthinking automatons - it's sad.

 

[RAMOSS]

Again, no science, no facts, just nonsense.

Leftists are unthinking automatons - it's sad.

Lol. And , this is someone who is quoting the cato institute!Q

 

[Antiwar]

I have a B.S. in chemistry - I understand the science better than most.

Of my fellow scientists, and I know many, I don't know any that believe AGW is going to be a "run away" problem.

You're being lied to.

Yeah, it's a global scientific conspiracy.

I also have a Bachelor's degree in science. Lots of people have Bachelor's degrees in science.

So your acquaintances have modeled the massive complexities of climate science and determined that there aren't tipping points. The fact is that the climate is too complex to be able to determine that, so the wise thing to do would be to stop abusing the climate/environment.

 

[wist43]

Lol... this is fun

So, here is exactly what he wrote...

Marty Makary, M.D., is a professor of surgery and health policy at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

Ignoring natural immunity

Ironically, when public health officials insisted that those who had natural immunity be fired for not being vaccinated, they fired those least likely to spread the infection in the workplace. Drs. Fauci and Rochelle Walensky never talked about natural immunity and instead created the imprecise construct of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. In reality, most unvaccinated Americans have antibodies that neutralized the virus, but they are antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Eventually the data came in. Natural immunity was 2.8 times better in preventing hospitalization than vaccinated immunity and having both meant you had the same protection as natural immunity alone.

-------------------------------

And here is exactly what you said he wrote,

The fact he claimed we would have natural herd immunity by April 2021 shows he's wrong.

---------------------

So, my indoctrinated friend - did he say what you said he said??

The answer is no??

So, why did you lie?? Just admit you're wrong... you liberals are something else

Lol. And , this is someone who is quoting the cato institute!Q

Are you so pathetic that you can't even admit you're wrong when the proof is right in front of you??

 

[Antiwar]

I have a B.S. in chemistry - I understand the science better than most.

Then you should be able to find the average amount of liquid fossil fuels burned daily, and multiply that by the pounds of carbon dioxide produced from combustion. You can either average the carbon dioxide for diesel, gasoline, and aviation fuels, or determine them separately and add them.

Post those numbers and tell us how pumping all of that carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day has no effect.

The US alone burns over 300 million gallons of gasoline every day.

 

[RAMOSS]

Are you so pathetic that you can't even admit you're wrong when the proof is right in front of you??

There is a difference between proof and people pushing misinformation.