Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Have read two articles this morning totally lying
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 37
| visibility 1

Have read two articles this morning totally lying


Jun 15, 2020, 9:02 AM

About the football matters shirt and the pearman incident.

If this whole episode doesn’t make every single one of you, regardless of your political leanings, want to second guess, check, research, study EVERYTHING you read from the media than nothing will and you just refuse to accept we have agenda driven, dishonest media.

It’s so obvious now whereas a couple decades ago it was much more nuanced so I could somewhat see an excuse back then.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I once had someone that work for me get arrested for some


Jun 15, 2020, 9:05 AM

pretty bad stuff. I knew the facts because I was aware of the situation. There were a couple of articles in the newspaper and they were just wrong. Their facts were obviously not checked.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


There's a reason they call it "fake news."***


Jun 15, 2020, 9:07 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

They're not reporting the news...


Jun 15, 2020, 9:14 AM
Media.jpeg(195.8 K)

...they're trying to make the news.

And they'll always fit it to their narrative.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Agree completely....


Jun 15, 2020, 9:22 AM

Getting paid based on the number of clicks is part of the problem.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Have read two articles this morning totally lying


Jun 15, 2020, 9:17 AM

Better maintain your anonymity or you'll be the one being lied about, then summarily cancelled, as a result. Good time to be a leftist in America. Somebody hurts your feelings and you can destroy their life. No need to throw them in a gulag, you can just render them unemployable for life and let them starve for upsetting you.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Have read two articles this morning totally lying


Jun 15, 2020, 9:48 AM

You do realize that "news" you are reading as well has a bias. I chuckle every time I hear "the left media is fake news" because it's not just the left. ALL news has a bias. In fact Benjamin Franklin supported reading multiple news sources and forming your opinion based on information out there. Sheesh

2024 orange level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Have read two articles this morning totally lying


Jun 15, 2020, 11:32 AM

Are you really suggesting we should take the advice of a slave owner???? ;)

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Or read posts of people to went to a school


Jun 15, 2020, 1:10 PM

named after a Slave Owner, confederate soldier, and who married the worst man in the history of mankind's daughter.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Problem is this cancel culture not necessarily


Jun 15, 2020, 9:19 AM

the media.

As a liberal, I can't stand it. Everyone regardless of political leanings needs to take a hard look at all sides of any issue, research it, make an informed decision, I agree.

If you weren't doing this before the Dabo issue, then you were going about it the wrong way imho.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Problem is this cancel culture not necessarily


Jun 15, 2020, 9:40 AM

I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum but I would agree for the most part. And as a part of the "cancel culture" I think it is considered a strawman argument is constantly used where you give your opposition a stance that is not truly theirs to argue against. I don't have a language centered mind, so somebody might have to correct me on my fallacy name. The thing that I would have a little disagreement with is the responsibility of the media. They are probably the worst offender when it comes to trashing the other side regardless of which one they are on.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Completely agree


Jun 15, 2020, 10:34 AM

whether you watch Fox or CNN, there seems clear biases everywhere. I think it's the profit motive to be honest, right or wrong. Gotta sell adverts!

And my gosh, no one can make a mistake anymore? I can't stand liberals who try and "out-liberal" each other, can't even imagine how irritating this would be to a conservative.

Message was edited by: PACIFIC BEACH TIGER®


2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sorry guys, but if you think


Jun 15, 2020, 1:15 PM

there is equal bias you have gone over the cliff. I live in your liberal bubble and watch the mainstream media. It is a fcking joke Every single network (ABC, CBS, NBC) and of course CNN and MSNBC.

Just recently local news started unabashedly criticizing Trump.

Seriously, if you believe you have any objectivity whatsoever, then you need to spend some time counting the unnecessary Trump comments, many of which are not true.

Guys, propaganda works! You are letting it work on you!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Not trying to be argumentative here..


Jun 15, 2020, 1:40 PM

but is there a possibility you could be in a bubble as well?

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Yes and No


Jun 15, 2020, 3:42 PM

I am in YOUR bubble. I listen/watch mainstream media more than Fox News which is the single conservative outlet on my 1200 cable channels.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Have read two articles this morning totally lying


Jun 15, 2020, 9:30 AM

“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

? Michael Crichton

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all....


Jun 15, 2020, 9:38 AM

This this the same guy who testified before congress saying climate change was a hoax?


This something I studied (scientifically) in graduate school so, I feel kind of the same about things he says.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all....


Jun 15, 2020, 9:59 AM

Climate change is a good example of what I am referring to in my reply to your other post, talking about a strawman argument (whether that is the correct name or not). Most conservatives are saddled my media and society of not believing in climate change or man's responsibility in it. I speak for myself, but believe that more conservatives than not would agree, in saying that climate change is faster than it has ever been and industrialization is responsible. I do not believe, however, that we are at a crisis level. Somehow the media and the left have a large portion of society believing that if you do not believe in radical changes that you do not believe in climate change at all.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Like I said, I studied this in grad school.


Jun 15, 2020, 10:48 AM

I am not relying on the media to help me form an opinion. As a mathematician I love data. It's there if you know where to look.

So, yeah, its a huge issue, trust me. Heck, don't believe me, believe the pentagon.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all....


Jun 15, 2020, 12:00 PM [ in reply to Re: While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all.... ]

One thing that crossed my mind when the subject of climate change was mentioned. Will the reduced number of airplane flights and less automobiles on the road during the pandemic reduce the pollution levels enough to have n effect on climate change? I realize this covers only a short time frame but the change in the level of pollution should be sufficient enough to at least create a tiny blip.

badge-ringofhonor-joe21.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all....


Jun 15, 2020, 3:35 PM

Not sure if the Chemtrail flights have been reduced or not.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Anybody that says Coach Brownell is the best coach to come through Clemson is going to start an argument." -JP Hall


Re: While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all....


Jun 15, 2020, 10:44 AM [ in reply to While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all.... ]

I'm with Dr. Judith Curry of Georgia Tech regarding climate change. It is changing, as it always has, and man probably has some influence on it, but it is the scare tactics used by some climate scientists and mostly politicians to control us that I have a problem with.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 10:51 AM

But please share with me the data that gives you this opinion (please don't take this as me being snarky -PLEASE!). I will always side with the science/data.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 12:20 PM

You can probably find data related to climate change easier than most others on here. Can you find some that shows a rise in average temperatures preceded by a rise in CO2 levels in the Earth's atmosphere versus temperatures rising first, then a corresponding rise in CO2? Increased plant life absorbs more CO2 and releases more oxygen. In short warmer temperatures cause a small rise in CO2, probably from an increase in decaying plant life

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 2:09 PM

Look up, "carbon pump" on NOAA. Once you've looked at it let me know what you think.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 12:23 PM [ in reply to I respectfully disagree... ]

When you look at the data, how does the data tell you that climate change is a "problem"?
When you look at the data, does it tell you what the Earth's average temperature should be?
Does it tell you how much variation is allowed in either direction?
Does it tell you that government spending is needed or economic conditions must change and/or some countries need to send some of their wealth to other countries to offset it?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 2:09 PM

Same, look up, "carbon pump" on NOAA. Once you've looked at it let me know what you think.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 3:38 PM [ in reply to Re: I respectfully disagree... ]

What is the ideal average temperature of the Earth and why?

If oceans get too warm and kill coral, doesn’t that mean that coral can now grow in water that used to be too cold?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Anybody that says Coach Brownell is the best coach to come through Clemson is going to start an argument." -JP Hall


Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 1:02 PM [ in reply to I respectfully disagree... ]

You are probably looking for the data that is like the
data that Dr. Fauci was spouting about covid-19.He was
wrooog and so are your liberal scientists who have been
spouting un-proven data for years. No offense to you.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If you're going to jump in this discussion...


Jun 15, 2020, 2:06 PM

please actually have something intelligent to say. That was VERY snarky in case you missed it.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 2:17 PM [ in reply to I respectfully disagree... ]

Even if warming is part of a natural cycle, it does seem quite likely that man is exacerbating the situation. If nothing else, if we could run our societies without belching pollution into the atmosphere, it'd be the better alternative. I look forward to clean fusion plants (now supposedly only 20 years in the future!).

So please don't call me a "denier". My issue is that few of the proposed "solutions" seem to be based on science. I see the occasional discussion of carbon sequestration and that sort of thing, but far more often the "solution" is just a cloak hiding the proposer's socialist SJW motives.

For example, the IPCC report on climate change...Let's see...it doesn't seem to be about the effect of climate on plants and animals (and humans). It does mention climatey things... It said that without action to address the problem, by the year 2100, hundreds of millions of people could be affected by coastal flooding and displaced due to land loss. "Impacts from recent extreme climatic events, such as heat waves, droughts, floods, and wildfires, show significant vulnerability and exposure of some ecosystems and many human systems to climate variability," the report warned.

But mainly, the IPCC report seems to be about poverty and income inequality and funding needed to address it.

The term "watermelon" describes these people: green on the outside, red on the inside.

For several years now, the climate alarmists have at least been more and more honest about their goals, and they have little to do with environmentalism or reversing climate change.

Most recently, far-left climate extremist Greta Thunberg unloaded on the world in an op-ed published recently, claiming that fossil fuels “are literally” killing mankind, and that they are a threat to “our very existence” as she said that her “climate crisis” agenda is not just about the environment, but about fighting the “colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression.”

And “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” [AOC's chief-of-staff] Chakrabarti said to Inslee’s climate director, Sam Ricketts, according to a Washington Post reporter who attended the meeting. “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing,” he added.

For many, it's about a new world order based on economic justice (aka: socialism), perhaps with some other SJW buzzwords:

(OTTMAR EDENHOFER, UN IPCC OFFICIAL): Basically it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War... First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

Christiana Figueres, leader of the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history.”

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti The Green New Deal "wasn’t originally a climate thing at all ... we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing."

Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth: “A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources.”

Daphne Muller, green-progressive-liberal writer for Salon: "This moment requires we the people to rethink democracy as a global mechanism for enacting policy for and by the planet."

Gus Hall, former leader of the Communist Party USA: "Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible."

David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward and society's only hope."


For some others, it's about the money or power, and they'll use the "science", real or imagined, to that end (but still tossing in a few SWJ buzzwords):

Monika Kopacz, atmospheric scientist: "It is no secret that a lot of climate-change research is subject to opinion, that climate models sometimes disagree even on the signs of the future changes (e.g. drier vs. wetter future climate). The problem is, only sensational exaggeration makes the kind of story that will get politicians’ — and readers’ — attention. So, yes, climate scientists might exaggerate, but in today’s world, this is the only way to assure any political action and thus more federal financing to reduce the scientific uncertainty."

Former U.S. Senator Timothy Wirth (D-CO), then representing the Clinton-Gore administration as U.S undersecretary of state for global issues, addressing the same Rio Climate Summit audience, agreed: “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”

Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: “No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

Researcher Robert Phalen's 2010 testimony to the California Air Resources Board: "It benefits us personally to have the public be afraid, even if these risks are trivial."

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 3:53 PM

Well looks like facts finally won out.

That's the way it is with any liberal. Eventually, after a conservative cites fact after undeniable fact, they fold. They have no response.

Their "facts" are hearsay, rumors, and opinions.

But, in case pacifico man comes back, here are a few more questions:
- How does the solar cycle affect Earth's temperature?
- How many times have glaciers grown and regressed? and why?
- Does he think it is reasonable to claim to profoundly know the cause of a phenomena governed by millions of variables, the large majority of which we have no idea how to define, and with a set of data over a window of time that literally rounds to zero compared to the 4,000,000,000+ year old Earth?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 4:03 PM

NC Tiger I have one more question to add to your list:
“Why are the polar ice caps on Mars receding?”

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I respectfully disagree...


Jun 15, 2020, 4:31 PM [ in reply to Re: I respectfully disagree... ]

Add: If the earth was cooling and glaciers were expanding and the seas retreating (as ice build-up captured more and more water) would these same scientists and politicians be recommending that we burn more stuff to put more CO2 into the atmosphere?

Sometimes I imagine a society 10,000 years or so ago, complete with MSNBC announcers pronouncing their dismay about the loss of habitat for the Ohio Basin polar bears, because the ice "which was once 1km thick is now only 250m and completely gone at some points".

And the shear panic they'd have had when Lake Agassiz let go the last time and raised sea level several feet in one year instead of centimeters per century.

Heck, they would have asked on polls: "Do you believe AGW is the cause for retreat of the Laurentide ice sheet? Yes or no?"

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all....


Jun 15, 2020, 1:36 PM [ in reply to While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all.... ]

Well it has been well documented one of the seminal papers on global warming WAS A FAKE!

There are plenty of educated scientists (and I mean plenty) who disagree with you on climate change. These are reputable people who are not left-wing zealots. Not sure if you are one or not, but these people have zero credibility on any scientific issue IMO. The left has lost the benefit of the doubt on most technical fronts.

Do humans affect earth? Yes. Is current climate change due to something very specific, like CO2 emissions? Unknown. There is no proof and will be no proof of climate change per se. The problem is too complex, and we do not have enough data over time to understand all complexities.

Remember, people educated just like you claimed the earth was freezing in the 1970s. Just like you - sincere scientists claiming to have enough data and claiming to understand the important cause and effect relationships.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: While I don't necessarily disagree with this at all....


Jun 15, 2020, 2:29 PM

Climate scientists who disagree with rubbish such as the Green New Deal fall into a similar category as people who disagree with the current media narrative about race. If you want to keep your job you better keep you mouth shut as anyone saying CC is over hyped or, God forbid, nothing more than a tool for the "Hate America" crowd to both pick our pockets and destroy our economy, would never work in their industry again and it wouldn't matter for one second if they could back up their opinions with facts. Just like it doesn't matter if you can back up the opinion that black folks aren't any more likely to be shot, per interaction with cops, than white folks. The evidence is clear but anyone who dares say it better be independently wealthy.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Have read two articles this morning totally lying


Jun 15, 2020, 1:11 PM [ in reply to Re: Have read two articles this morning totally lying ]

Why do y'all read these garbage rags anyway? Especially if what they are reporting is all wrong. Why read them and watch the crap on TV news? Just baffles the crap out of me. It's like being addicted to a drug, you can't do without it.

I get all my news from Tigernet. Truth and accountability.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Have read two articles this morning totally lying


Jun 15, 2020, 1:38 PM

Excellent question and I have asked my wife the same ...she says it is important to see/hear what the other side is saying.

I can only take so much of it, though. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Replies: 37
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic