Wikipedia's liberal bias
-
Wonder who's behind that.
I googled the authors. I think it may be either a troll or a parody. Judging from the reviews on Amazon, it got a few bites. Of course, there's always Poe's Law to consider.
-
I googled the authors. I think it may be either a troll or a parody.
Yeah, it's definitely a Sad/Rabid Puppies inspired combination parody / troll.
-
Yeah, it's definitely a Sad/Rabid Puppies inspired combination parody / troll.
Based on the first book, I wonder how much of the stuff they parody actually happened.
-
Words like "bias", "terrorist", and "Benghazi" have generally been used by right wing people to describe people they don't like. Similarly, words like "fracking", "global warming", and "fuck you Ben, that was two words" have been used by left wing people.
So the conservatives are more plain spoken?
-
Uh, dude, it's called Global Warming now, eh? Get with the times.
No - it was
global cooling
in the 70's,global warming
in the 80's thenclimate change
because the scientists realised that if they kept changing the direction of the temperature change nomenclature every decade then the public wouldn't believe them, so they went with something more temperature-neutral but scary sounding nevertheless.
-
Yeah, it's definitely a Sad/Rabid Puppies inspired combination parody / troll.
I'm starting to think these people really have no limits to how low they will stoop.
I know, right?
-
@tar said:
Am I the only one who thinks that ,regardless of whatever silly name its given, we're actually looking at a potential extinction event and should actually plan a contingency for it?Uh, dude, it's called Global Warming now, eh? Get with the times.
No - it was
global cooling
in the 70's,global warming
in the 80's thenclimate change
because the scientists realised that if they kept changing the direction of the temperature change nomenclature every decade then the public wouldn't believe them, so they went with something more temperature-neutral but scary sounding nevertheless.No we argue it's cold in winter global warming is a hoax! It's warm in summer global cooling is a hoax. Climate change is a scary term! Fucking hell isn't there proof that climate change is real and we should be planning for a potential extinction event?
No wait! I forgot. Our species is retarded! Good riddance to the human race I say.
-
Am I the only one who thinks that ,regardless of whatever silly name its given, we're actually looking at a potential extinction event and should actually plan a contingency for it?
No. Lots of other people think the tax payer should be paying scientists and subsidising the green-energy industry for claptrap as well, for the imaginary impending disaster that won't happen.
-
@DogsB said:
I'm all for renewable energy sources because I do actually believe that we will hit a point where its actually more expensive to pull the oil out of the earth than selling it for profit. Why the tax payer is footing the bill when private entities that will benefit from it won't surrender the profit is beyond my comprehension apparently.Am I the only one who thinks that ,regardless of whatever silly name its given, we're actually looking at a potential extinction event and should actually plan a contingency for it?
No. Lots of other people think the tax payer should be paying scientists and subsidising the green-energy industry for claptrap as well,
for the imaginary impending disaster that won't happen.
I don't actually know enough but if the people at the forefront of this are saying something is happening shouldn't we investigate. I thought we have sciency people for that?
-
I do actually believe that we will hit a point where its actually more expensive to pull the oil out of the earth than selling it for profit.
That's where you're wrong. If there's nothing else to replace it, which is what the deniers want, then the price of oil will go up far beyond the cost of pulling it out of the ground, no matter how high the price. Until we all die.Basic supply and demand, innit.
-
That's where you're wrong. If there's nothing else to replace it, which is what the deniers want, then the price of oil will go up far beyond the cost of pulling it out of the ground, no matter how high the price. Until we all die.
I'll just fill my thank with Ethanol.
-
If there's nothing else to replace it, which is what the deniers want,
That sounds crazy. Who wants that?
-
Who wants that?
Massive multinational corporations who have everything invested in oil extraction. The dinosaurs who are just beginning to realise that they can't stamp on all those little rodents.
-
Massive multinational corporations who have everything invested in oil extraction.
Only nazis like you believe that.
-
Arbeit macht frei, you lazy cunt.
-
-
The dinosaurs who are just beginning to realise that they can't stamp on all those little rodents.
The dinosaurs are all getting dumped into our gas tanks. They have no say in the matter.
-
Am I the only one who thinks that ,regardless of whatever silly name its given, we're actually looking at a potential extinction event and should actually plan a contingency for it?
No, a lot of people think that, but my own uneducated guess is that they're wrong. It's definitely going to suck for a lot of people, and it will probably cost more to fix a few civilizations than it would cost to fix the problems now. I don't think it will destroy the entire human species, though. Humans are too adaptable to be completely wiped out by what will be relatively minor (geologically speaking) climate shifts.
-
Humans are too adaptable to be completely wiped out by what will be relatively minor (geologically speaking) climate shifts.
wikipedia claims that "Unmitigated climate change (i.e., future climate change without efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions) would, in the long term, be likely to exceed the capacity of natural, managed and human systems to adapt."
-
The worst case scenario is probably a mass die-off of anything land-based that's larger than a cockroach, and then a couple million years or relative peace and quiet before stuff starts crawling back out of the sea and the whole sorry cycle begins afresh...
Filed under: when viewed in terms of the lifetime of a star, most problems seem fairly small
-
Humans are too adaptable to be completely wiped out by what will be relatively minor (geologically speaking) climate shifts.
Yes, but it would be nice if we retained some civilisation too. Just sayin'…
-
Scenario: You, @Fox, and @Polygeekery are the only remaining humans. What do you do?
-
-
Scenario: You, @Fox, and @Polygeekery are the only remaining humans. What do you do?
sjws have very little substance to them so I'll guess I'll have to kill both of them for a decent meal.
-
repopulating the Earth: unlikely
THIS SUMMER: three men attempt to save humanity from the apocalypse that only left three men alive
two of the men are alive, the third was killed by the apocalypse. nobody knows where the third living man is, but he's not in the movie.
-
And over here in the UK, we have the Monster Raving Loony Party.
The flabby Australian doesn't like you appropriating his culture like that.
-
Scenario: You, @Fox, and @Polygeekery are the only remaining humans. What do you do?
Oh, that's easy …
I just go fishing. :P
-
Scenario: You, @Fox, and @Polygeekery are the only remaining humans. What do you do?
The one that likes guns, might be a threat, and the biologist could work as a medic.
But the guns could be useful against whatever killed everyone else.
I'm undecided, would probably run away from these 2.
-
-
I also like guns, coincidentally. And bladed weapons. I also have a sense of honor and know that cooperation is a highly adaptive trait for survival.
-
What are you? A fucking vegan. Guess who else was a vegan.
-
What are you? A fucking vegan.
Wow, that was a whoosh.
Anyway, vegans don't even eat animal byproducts, so your "joke" doesn't even work. Since you seem to believe I meant actual hook-in-water fishing: why would a vegan go fishing? Of course, to even get there, you have to skip over what I meant in the first place: get @Fox and @Polygeekery into a flamewar and relax at a safe distance.
-
The vegan thing was a delibrate non-sequitur but tooshay on the rest fello tooshay.
-
I also like guns, coincidentally. And bladed weapons. I also have a sense of honor and know that cooperation is a highly adaptive trait for survival.
are you going to do in a doomsday scenario? Start a petition on change.org? Bitch and whine about how things should be different?
-
-
@tufty said:
If there's nothing else to replace it, which is what the deniers want,
That sounds crazy. Who wants that?
Shills like these. Often quoted as a "reputable source" in global warming debates 10 years ago.
-
@fbmac said:
I'll just fill my thank with Ethanol.
I have better uses for ethanol. ;)
It's more methanol anyway. And the production in Brazil is its own ecological disaster.
-
Yay a movie with Daryl in it.
-
-
What's his other brother's name?
-
Also Darrel, but a different spelling.
-
it was global cooling in the 70's
The media said there was global cooling in the 70s, the scientific consensus never did
-
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4487
Websites of global warming deniers [...]
Clearly a neutral article on the matter, not written by climate change alarmists....
-
Is calling someone who denies global warming a "global warming denier" non-PC now? What's the right term? Transglobalwarmists?
-
Is calling someone who denies global warming a "global warming denier" non-PC now?
Ignoring the question begging, it's the most PC of PC, of course.
-
Is calling someone who denies global warming a "global warming denier" non-PC now?
Only in the same way that calling someone who creates unnecessary alarm while simultaneously rent-seeking can called a "renk-seeking climate change alarmist."
-
-
> Websites of global warming deniers [...]
Clearly a neutral article on the matter, not written by climate change alarmists....
As usual, a cheap Ad Hominem based on wording is all we get when the job would be to refute the sources cited, particularly this survey.
-
As usual, a cheap Ad Hominem based on wording is all we get when the job would be to refute the sources cited, particularly this survey.
That's a published paper, therefore it is probably reality-based, therefore it is liberal, therefore it must be ignored by all right-thinking people. QED.
-