681–690 of 968 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every single journalist in the video Paul Graham linked was on Fox News/Fox Business.
The video appears that it was put together by the folks at The Daily Show. You really think they went looking for clips from the "other side?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're misrepresenting what GP said. They didn't say "experts", they said: > all the people who have made confident predictions over the years regarding global warming. You can't deny that most of the people speaking publicly, and by far the loudest people, are not experts, they are politicians, journalists, and filmmakers. (And tech entrepreneurs...) Many of those have predicted disasters that never happened. But ju…
No, it is the scientists that have predicted the disaster, with an overwhelming consensus, hence the downvotes.
The actual report is far more balanced. Yes, they are predicting some negative consequences, alongside potential benefits and measures for adapation and mitigation.
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar5_wgII_spm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I see one prediction from an actual modern climate scientist. That's a nice "No True Scotsman" right there. Unless, of course, you can give me a non-arbitrary reason why Dr. David Barber of the University of Manitoba speaking in 2008 is a "pre-modern" climate scientist, whereas Dr. James Hansen of NASA writing in 2009 is a "modern" climate scientist.
I've seen this game played countless times. "Sources?" Then you do the job of googling for them. Retrieve a few relevant sources. And they proceed to shoot them down, even moving goalposts if necessary. They might come back with their own confirmation biased sources. This instance is even more egregious. There is a growing mountain of evidence for climate change. Multiple books, across multiple disciplines, can and h…
Much like flat earthers, climate deniers seem to have attached their identity to this claim rather than viewing the data with any objectivity.
Do people appreciate that denial of the severity of this virus came from all political quarters? Here's one showing the mistakes of left-leaning media I found in 2 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=36&v=wVDPVBZF2Xg It's just as easy to find supercuts of Pelosi, DeBlasio, and other prominent Democrats telling people that they didn't need to start social distancing or that the virus wasn't airborne c…
This is approximately the time that the first patient tested positive in the U.S. The video that OP references goes into February and March, so I don't think these are equivalent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually followed the coverage the first time, and where the ban was criticized it was almost entirely for being too late for that response to be useful, not unwarranted by the severity of the disease. Of course, if there really are “countless” examples supporting your characterization, it will be easy for you to cite some.
The China travel ban was ordered on Jan 28th and active on Feb 3rd. The WHO didn't confirm human transmission until Jan 25th... Some of many examples of the media in Jan and Feb: https://twitter.com/LizRNC/status/1245478539018805251?s=20 https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/01/31/how-our-br... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/world/europe/coronavirus-... https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/03/the-flu-has-already-ki…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> CNN/Fox/MSNBC One of those is not like the other two. CNN and MSNBC may not be as high quality as WaPo/NYTimes in terms of depth and quality of journalism, but they also don't maliciously and cynically and shamelessly lie to their viewers.
I'm a Pepsi guy. It always annoys me when someone offers me a Pepsi and then gives me Coke. I can tell, and I don't drink it. People don't get my attitude. "How can you even tell the difference?" they say. "It's pretty much the same!" This is because when your favorite soda is Mountain Dew, you can barely tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi. They're both a heck of a lot different from Mtn Dew, and there's only…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A bad year for influenza is about Maybe about tenth your figure, once you exclude non-flu pneumonia-- which is about where we are now for covid19. Flu death figures are Flu+Pneumonia because they usually don't check. Efforts to separate flu from flu + pneumonia all result in flu being a small fraction of the total ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3827586/ ).
The point still holds to compare Covid vs flu+pneumonia then. This is some weird No True Scotsman argument you're making where it's not the "True Flu" if they had pneumonia as well... (likely getting pneumonia because of the flu) I doubt the dead people would be comforted by such a subtle distinction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.icelandreview.com/ask-ir/whats-the-status-of-cov... 27,000 samples 1,500 confirmed 37 hospitalized (2%) 460 recovered Here's the official stats from Iceland. How would you comment these numbers?
What I have to comment? We know what is the death rate in Germany, France, Spain, Italy, South Korea. 1500 cases is ridiculously low to take any conclusion, they are far behind the curve.
In the background global warming is a much greater threat to human life and has the exact same dynamic with the exact same players . There is also zero introspection - the people who were wrong about covid-19 are simply denying they said what they said. The truly scary part is they are getting away with it in real time, and changing a large populations' memory of contemporary events. I realize it's hard to remember f…
Nobody likes to be wrong, and people always try to rewrite history so they were right all along. Rush Limbaugh made hay by hanging democrats with clips of their previous statements, and Jon Stewart made hay by doing the same thing to republicans.