On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 12:41:55 -0400
Steve Kinney <ad...@pilobilus.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> On 10/24/2016 10:03 AM, John Newman wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 24, 2016, at 7:34 AM, Zenaan Harkness <z...@freedbms.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Another to add to the viewing list:
> >>
> >> Ivar Giaever, Nobel Laureate Physics 1973, speaks for about half
> >> an hr on "global warming" and various aspects of the ongoing
> >> controversy,
> >
> > What controversy? A few badly confused outliers is not a
> > controversy.
>
> Attributing the widely promoted views of these individuals to
> confusion is a very charitable assessment. Anyone with a Ph.D. in any
> of the sciences who speaks against the overwhelming consensus model
As if truth was a matter of mob agreement.
> in
> climatology and misrepresents the data supporting it obtains patronage
> from two of the most powerful industries in the world: Petrochemicals
> and Public Relations.
Go ahead, ignore the fact that your consensus of academic
parasites is exactly that. Your climate 'scientists' are highly
paid university parasites, pandering to 'progressive' eco
fascists.
If you are going to look at incentives do it in a
consistent manner.
And let me see. Is ther e 'progressive' 'eco friendly'
highly subsidized 'industry' out there? Why, yes, there
is.
Maybe the 'green' industries' have some sort of
incentives for spewing 'global-warming-climate-change'
propaganda?
> Patronage is also available to anyone who is
> paid to stand in front of a blue screen and talk about the weather: A
> strong consensus among meteorologists (and other entertainers)
> supports Barnum's Law, which states "There is no such thing as bad
> publicity."
>
> The same propaganda techniques used in the long war against medical
> science conducted by tobacco companies
Actually, weren't your beloved 'medical' 'scientists' in bed
with the tobacco companies?
Et cetera.
> have been recycled by today's
> campaigns against climatology, because they work. Opposing physical
> reality by lying about it may appear to be a losing battle but look
> again: A delaying action that only costs a few million dollars, while
> enabling its sponsoring industries to harvest tens of billions of
> dollars while a fabricated "debate" drags on, is a net winning
> strategy.
>
> >> along with his unique viewpoints:
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCy_UOjEir0
>
> "Unique viewpoints" in the physical sciences /rarely/ turn out to be
> useful. When they are not products of simple error or crackpot
> beliefs, "unique viewpoints" don't stay unique for more than a few
> months and get incorporated into consensus models within a few years.
>
> So many videos, so little time. Promoters of the "chemtrails"
> delusion also publish lots of videos on YouTube: First, because their
> target demographic will not read anything longer than a typical
> Facebook post; second, because A/V presentations are inherently more
> persuasive than print; third, because dissecting bullshit and lies
> presented in video format requires one to first type a transcript of
> that bullshit in order to quote and comment on it. And why bother?
> True Believers are emotionally invested in "being right" and mere
> facts will not persuade them, especially when they are presented with
> a continuing stream of professionally crafted rationalizations
> supporting their belief.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYDjnTAAoJEECU6c5XzmuqTJgH/04Jw1RQjTx9KpSmxHvMoQ0M
> jkBXssGVm4OWMqwKlYLDaEr2xTig6yZQybcRUHHTxWyH975+omNoFj2CIczy5iVX
> rCAdqLCf2qB+1Oc58c3FN2dkJTF7JwGVwlUw1KbdKZhO5IfrrpNqf6zcpFaJHtfm
> RG91Q89HjUPS8MF2kJc2jyXaNDaE7FrIFVb0RSNBgzqx6Qv3MM+7Cc2m0+RrECwD
> 95AhKrBglbsIie7D2Apra5PFWE/Ube+aCps/prBJofb/7y6B2xF285xRZf3MOltO
> CC0pt3avCCTgJcgp7u2UbLmbDKyh/BKIvIVY7e4vjzFqV5L3sX9eJPvANfMRACQ=
> =NLTL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
