Global Warming now officially bullshit

UnripeArbiter said:
This is also why I believe PBS and NPR kick all ass because they lack a profit motive.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the Soviet Union, Cuba and pre-capitalist China kicked ass without a profit motive too. :rolleyes:

NPR and PBS don't lack a profit motive. They simply have a business model that makes them accountable to their listeners rather than their advertisers. No one at NPR or PBS works full time for free and I can assure you that none of their top hosts are hard up for money.
 


UnripeArbiter said:
Does anyone find it ironic/weird/maybe hypocritical that FOX news is so conservative while their entertainment programming is so liberal. (Simpsons, Family Guy, on and on....)

They spout all these "values" while at the same time they are liberal as all hell with their entertainment programming.

It's simply because they want to make profit, obviously, but damn. The only reason FOX is conservative at all is probably because there weren't any other conservative channels on tv and they saw that void and filled it.

If all the channels before FOX were conservative then FOX would have filled the void and been liberal. Profit, profit, profit, not "values".

Every station is the same however, they are all biased towards whatever audience they are targetting. So in reality no station has a liberal or a conservative bias first and foremost they have a profit motive bias. They slant the news towards whatever makes them the most money.

This is also why I believe PBS and NPR kick all ass because they lack a profit motive.
Click to expand...

Fox = shit.

Even if they claim him to be conservative opinion journalism, does conservative thought need someone like GLENN BECK? Isn't GB the political equivalent of the Jerry Springer show?

On one hand you have Ayn Rand, and on the other you have Glenn Beck. It's like comparing Marilyn Monroe to Rosie O'Donnell.

Conservatism doesn't need this monkey in a clown suit.

This brings us back to Fox. It's all about viewers and advertising to them. That's why they are willing to put O'Reilly and Beck on. It's like watching a god-damn street-brawl, people tune and ratings go up.

But it alienates people. Nobody wants to be a conservative after watching Glenn Beck or O'Reilly.
 
Maybe the fact is that most people are intellectually stunted morons, adults trapped in a childish emotional state, and Fox is monetizing that audience as effectively as some folks here monetize the Oprah crowd with RezV and Acai.

If you don't like the news on Fox, there are a lot of other places to get your news. If you don't find something you like, you may have discovered a niche to exploit.

Complaining about Fox or MSNBC or CNN is a waste of time. You are not their audience. They don't give a shit what you think.
 
UnripeArbiter said:
...why I believe PBS and NPR kick all ass because they lack a profit motive.
Click to expand...

Did you mean to say "suck ass"? Government news is as pathetic as government cars and grocery stores (also called bread lines).

===============================

Global warming:

Is it happening? Maybe, but let's assume yes.

Is it human caused? Maybe, but let's assume yes.

Can it be stopped by any means? Probably not, but let's assume yes.

Can government fix it? ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING WAY - assuming yes here is just ridiculous. Has government fixed the MUCH EASIER issues of poverty in Africa, illegal drug proliferation, low standards of education...the list goes on. In fact, if you look at any problems that can't be solved by a military stomping it to death - you would be hard pressed to come up with successful examples of government at work.

If government takes on global warming, we will be hunter-gatherers in decades and the globe will be hotter than any dire predictions.

=======================

Need a solution? Reduce government -- clean tech will grow exponentially if government is not draining resources from the people. I doubt global warming is a real issue, but I would love to privately own solar/wind power which is clean, non-centralized, and keeps me from relying on utilities.

Get government out of our pockets, out of energy, out of medicine, out of foreign aid, ...well, you get the idea. Problems will have a much better chance of solving themselves without a bunch of meglomaniacs picking our pockets to payoff their buddies.
 
guerilla said:
Yeah, the Soviet Union, Cuba and pre-capitalist China kicked ass without a profit motive too. :rolleyes:

NPR and PBS don't lack a profit motive. They simply have a business model that makes them accountable to their listeners rather than their advertisers. No one at NPR or PBS works full time for free and I can assure you that none of their top hosts are hard up for money.
Click to expand...

Well I wasn't trying to compare media outlets to nations but yeah, they "kicked ass" without profit motive too.

I know they don't work for free... but yeah they are accountable to the people and not the advertisers like you said. So there is the difference, the BIG difference.

Really though, if anyone is relying on ONE station for news then they're definitely sheeple. It's pretty much the definition isn't it? Everyone needs to be watching and READING many sources of news and come to their own conclusions.
 
ONE station for news then they're definitely sheeple
Click to expand...

Agreed - but unfortunately the true libertarian perspective is non-existent. Big media either leans towards big government or bigger government, your choice.
 
Karnul said:
Did you mean to say "suck ass"? Government news is as pathetic as government cars and grocery stores (also called bread lines).

===============================

Global warming:

Is it happening? Maybe, but let's assume yes.

Is it human caused? Maybe, but let's assume yes.

Can it be stopped by any means? Probably not, but let's assume yes.

Can government fix it? ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING WAY - assuming yes here is just ridiculous. Has government fixed the MUCH EASIER issues of poverty in Africa, illegal drug proliferation, low standards of education...the list goes on. In fact, if you look at any problems that can't be solved by a military stomping it to death - you would be hard pressed to come up with successful examples of government at work.

If government takes on global warming, we will be hunter-gatherers in decades and the globe will be hotter than any dire predictions.

=======================

Need a solution? Reduce government -- clean tech will grow exponentially if government is not draining resources from the people. I doubt global warming is a real issue, but I would love to privately own solar/wind power which is clean, non-centralized, and keeps me from relying on utilities.

Get government out of our pockets, out of energy, out of medicine, out of foreign aid, ...well, you get the idea. Problems will have a much better chance of solving themselves without a bunch of meglomaniacs picking our pockets to payoff their buddies.
Click to expand...

Government makes cars? When? Are you talking about GM? And what about the people in those bread lines? You just want to take that away from them?

Illegal drug proliferation, LOL, the goverment could legalize them and BAM! done. All the drug related gang violence solved (no more profits for them), over filled prisons solved, the "problem" of trying to control proliferation solved, the Mexican border violence SOLVED. That's something the government could get out of like you want and it would be perfect. :) Of course, they could still tax it and use that money to fund drug programs for people that WANT it.

Poverty in Africa? That's probably because the lack of stable government over there if anything, lol.

Low standards of education? Who's setting those standards? The government? The Department of Education? So ask the government to raise the standards.

You just can't say "rid us of the government!" across the board. It doesn't work like that hence reality in America.

I do agree with the clean tech. Solar will grow exponentially and will supply a sizable chunk of the energy needs a few decades out. Tech will save us all :) Hopefully....
 
Karnul said:
Did you mean to say "suck ass"? Government news is as pathetic as government cars and grocery stores (also called bread lines).

===============================

Global warming:

Is it happening? Maybe, but let's assume yes.

Is it human caused? Maybe, but let's assume yes.

Can it be stopped by any means? Probably not, but let's assume yes.

Can government fix it? ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING WAY - assuming yes here is just ridiculous. Has government fixed the MUCH EASIER issues of poverty in Africa, illegal drug proliferation, low standards of education...the list goes on. In fact, if you look at any problems that can't be solved by a military stomping it to death - you would be hard pressed to come up with successful examples of government at work.

If government takes on global warming, we will be hunter-gatherers in decades and the globe will be hotter than any dire predictions.

=======================

Need a solution? Reduce government -- clean tech will grow exponentially if government is not draining resources from the people. I doubt global warming is a real issue, but I would love to privately own solar/wind power which is clean, non-centralized, and keeps me from relying on utilities.

Get government out of our pockets, out of energy, out of medicine, out of foreign aid, ...well, you get the idea. Problems will have a much better chance of solving themselves without a bunch of meglomaniacs picking our pockets to payoff their buddies.
Click to expand...

The government hasn't "solved" the issue of poverty, drug proliferation and illiteracy. But then neither has libertarianism. Unlike libertarianism, the government's contribution has actually had some positive effect though.
 
Karnul said:
Agreed - but unfortunately the true libertarian perspective is non-existent. Big media either leans towards big government or bigger government, your choice.
Click to expand...

At least on tv, I'm sure you can find plenty of sources on the net.

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

Check this out NPR and PBS really do kick ass.

Public Good vs. Profit Motive: Who Gives Us More Accurate
Information?

NPR and PBS kicked FOX's ass when questions were asked to both their audiences to see who could answer correctly.

Example: Has the US Found Clear Evidence that Iraq was Working Closely with al-Qaeda?

% of People Who Answered Correctly NPR and PBS ~ 80% got it right.

Fox.... about 30%.

That document is proof to me that FOX viewers are less informed.
 
So even though NPR and PBS are "government media" they do a better job of informing the public than the capitalist media machines.

So there's one example of goverment doing something right.... Geez.
 
popeye said:
But yet you "wana be" progressives will watch a comedy show (Jon Stewart) for your news!
Click to expand...
Or people like myself don't do either, get news online, and read news stories not biased commentator stories. The purpose of the news isn't to give viewpoints, it's to report facts. I hear "news" stories all the time on cable channels that begin with phrases such as "the government is over-reaching its bounds and..." or "why isn't the government protecting us from..." - I don't like reporters and anchors telling me opinions within the stories. Just report the facts... But wait, news reporting doesn't draw viewers, having opinionated commentators does.
popeye said:
They have to find the money for research from somewhere. The government, Al Gore and and global corps has too much money to lose to be funding research that debunks thier claims.
Click to expand...
Wait, so the goverment is perpetrating this global warming hoax to tax us and our businesses more, with research funded by big corporations who will be taxed more? WTF?
 
1) Since when has NPR been government media? They gov only pays like 2% of the running cost of a NPR station. Which is why they always have fund drives 2-3 times a year. Did it used to be govt radio? perhaps. Is it still? not a chance. Its far more driven by its listeners and the public than the govt.

2) Oh the issue of Glen Beck I find him to be a total retard. He grabs some piece of news spins it like crazy and causes all the idiots that follow him to be scared or out raged. I recall that one day he said that when people went to the cash for clunkers website that the govt was going to go though all of their files and that the computer belonged to the govt. He was going nuts at Obama and how they were stealing our rights. I half believed him for a sec until I check with normal news sources and found that was only for the dealer login and was quite common practice for govt computer networks. Glen Beck = Idiot.

3) Why are people fighting so hard to claim that global warming is bull crap? I love the idea even if it is true or not because it has changed the way people think for the better. Because of it we have started to use more wind and solar power, we have hybrid cars, soon we will have mass electric cars. Our lives and environment are being changed for the better by the idea that it might not last.

What do you think would happen if tomorrow everyone said there was no global warming? Funding for green sciences would die, the big auto makers would scrap all of their hybrid and electric cars, we would stop building green energy projects and stop funding its research. Why? Because its much easier to just keep building and burning cheap coal, its much easier to keep using gas in our cars, its much easier to just keep relying on old technology than to make new ones.

Global warming is an invisible hand forcing us to think of new solutions to our problems and to find better ways to solve existing ones. Even if the world isn't warming up we are still causing massive damage to the environment though other means.
 
johu said:
Wait, so the goverment is perpetrating this global warming hoax to tax us and our businesses more, with research funded by big corporations who will be taxed more? WTF?
Click to expand...
That's right.

Corporations will make it back by being able to derivative trade in carbon credits. Al Gore and that guy from Enron cooked up this scheme almost 10 years ago. I forget his name.

The real drivers of the AGW hysteria are the UN because they are currently funded by individual countries. Under the various enviro schemes they have cooked up, including this global currency (carbon credits) they will be able to tax and operate independently of nation state donors.

To see how silly the politics are, the AGW costs will be dumped on relatively energy efficient westerners, and not on energy inefficient eastern producer nations. Strictly a wealth transfer, and in the case of carbon credits, basically a handout to corporations and wall street, as they will now have their own independent currency to trade in.

Let's face it, industrialization produces the most gases, and those jobs are being offshored by mega corps to Asia. They recoup tax money on the backside of this deal.
 
Let's face it, industrialization produces the most gases, and those jobs are being offshored by mega corps to Asia. They recoup tax money on the backside of this deal.
Click to expand...

Actually if you look at the numbers cattle produces the most green house gas, and westerners are far from energy efficient. As I recall it was China, India and the US in the top 3 for carbon emissions. Since the majority of our energy infrastructure is still made up of coal burning power plants.

If anything I would say that eastern countries are far more energy efficient minus China and India.
 
Well, the coal lobby has successfully limited the proliferation of super clean nuclear energy.

They stand to gain a lot trading carbon credits. They reduce their output, giving them an artificial price hike, and then sell excess credits to be used as derivatives by wall street.

Also, water is a larger portion of greenhouse gases than anything cows or humans produce.

The AGW argument is just another wealth transfer scam.
 
Sorry to interrupt all this "Science" but it's really this simple...

Fox News $ays whatever the Oil Companies pay them to $ay.
Fox News also $ays whatever the health insurance companies pay them to $ay.

And sometimes Glenn Beck cries...


Why is this so hard to understand?
 
johu said:
Wait, so the goverment is perpetrating this global warming hoax to tax us and our businesses more, with research funded by big corporations who will be taxed more? WTF?
Click to expand...

By "government" they must mean "democrats", because I don't recall Glen Beck and friends being that concerned when the government was suppressing evidence, pressuring scientists, appointing an oil lobbyist to lead an environmental council, having a federal judge say they were breaking the law, etc. :usa:

NASA's Leading Climate Scientist Says Corrupt Politics is Covering Up the Truth About Global Warming
Suppressed Bush-Era Finding on Global Warming Released - FOXNews.com
The Secret Campaign of President Bush's Administration To Deny Global Warming : Rolling Stone
US climate scientists pressured on climate change - environment - 31 January 2007 - New Scientist
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom