[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'I')t's the The Borowitz Report and I got snookered.

[ennui2]

Borowitz Report is legendary for being presented without proper disclaimers to warn people that it's satire. Saying "The news, reshuffled" with a smiling caricature of the guy isn't enough. It looks too much like real news and it's irresponsible journalism.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', 'B')orowitz Report is legendary for being presented without proper disclaimers to warn people that it's satire. Saying "The news, reshuffled" with a smiling caricature of the guy isn't enough. It looks too much like real news and it's irresponsible journalism.

[dinopello]

Here is Maher's take.

[onlooker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lore', 'Y')ou have a point. It's called kick the can down the road and hope you're not around by then to catch the hot potato.

I pity the poor suckers left in charge with no solution other than to suggest to their constituency to grab ankles firmly with both hands, put head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.

[dinopello]

Pope, GOP collide on Climate Change

This should be fun to watch.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he Vatican is set to release Pope Francis' highly anticipated encyclical -- an official document delivering teachings from the Pope -- on the environment and climate change this week. Marking the second such document from the Pope since he assumed the papacy in March 2013, the encyclical is expected to cast the battle against global warming as a moral obligation.

[Lore]

No longer interesting, just dumb on the conservative politicians part. You have to figure it's pretty much over when the leader of a major religion is opposed to your views.

[Dybbuk]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lore', 'N')o longer interesting, just dumb on the conservative politicians part.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dybbuk', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lore', 'N')o longer interesting, just dumb on the conservative politicians part.

[Keith_McClary]

Tomgram: Naomi Oreskes, Why Climate Deniers Are Their Own Worst Nightmares
Posted by Naomi Oreskes at 7:57am, June 16, 2015.

[KaiserJeep]

Bill Maher is a f*cking liar. I watched the clip and I know.

I KNOW already that most of you flaming rectums think that you can tap into the Internet and your f*cking big dome intellects will let you filter completely error-free the TRUTH from all of the BS.

I am going to say this once. I was born in 1951, and I was in Junior High School when the great majority of Climate Scientists were screaming that we were about to induce an Ice Age. They were blaming a wide variety of causes, everything from paving over grasslands to acid rain to algae blooms caused by fertilizer runoffs. Some were even talking about the then new technology high altitude jets - the Boeing 707 was the popular target - destroying the ozone layer and causing the planet to first cloud up worse than Venus, and then freeze.

It was not "one NewsWeek article" as Maher puts it. Popular Science magazine had a cover with glaciers crunching over Manhattan, toppling the tall buildings. Scientific American published the latest and greatest on the approaching Ice Age nearly every month. Even Boy's Life, a publication from the Boy Scouts of America, was offering helpful hints about waterproofing frame structures, then earth-berming them so that you could survive the coming harsh winters.

This was not the first time when the vast consensus of scientists was wrong about something. That has happened many times and will continue to happen, because the Universe is an infinite place and our understanding of it is finite and grows slowly. It so happens that this more recent mistake was about climate - and embarrassingly, was wrong in the exact opposite way that the current crop of AGW fanboys is wrong.

Now all of you are foaming at the mouth, ready to jump in my sh*t, and tell me that I am WRONG about the things I personally experienced, and that you can prove that I am wrong, by linking me to some BS text somewhere on the internet, - or Bill Maher - and that the virtual internet truth trumps my life and personal memories of what I experienced.

Sorry folks, time to face up to what you don't want to think about: the Internet is a virtual reality and it is being edited in real time by millions of people, with thousands of different and often opposing agendas.

You can find some versions of the truth in the approximately 50,000 online History texts in the Project Gutenberg archive:

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/subject/2091

...including everything I ever told you about the US Civil War and the origins of the two major US political parties. But unfortunately, everything that has happened since 1900 or so is NOT History, it is an entire other topic called Current Events.

Project Gutenberg does have a Current Events section, but it is a contentious place, full of academic catfights and with texts recorded by people wearing Red and Blue colored glasses, blaming each other for the world's problems.

We are now arriving at some form of consensus about the events of the period from 1900 up to the Great War. Soon a few of the many versions of the events of that time will be accepted as History, aka the academic consensus of the interpretation of events that happened then. Which is not, after all, the same as objective reality.

In another 50 years or so, we will have decided what History will record of the widespread popular panic about an Ice Age, induced by mankind's unwise and widespread impacts on the natural world, in the 1980's. Some of the same AGW fanboys of today are very anxious that you should forget their roles in that regrettable period of the recent events. Because that would make their efforts to produce a panic today more credible.

In another century, we will know whether the AGW fanboys were wrong again, or partly right, or entirely correct. But in fact the political winds are shifting, and it is unlikely that the next couple of decades will have politicians in power who believe in renewable energy or climate change.

They are NOT denying PO or CC, they are uncertain about it, and changing the subject, and effectively banning debate, as with all polarizing issues that would divide the vote in the coming election. I can tell you now, both major parties will not have PO and CC as part of their party political planks. Politicians of both major parties will make passing mention of PO and CC in speeches, taking whatever position garners the most votes from that audience, at that time, in that place. The following week in a different place, a different position will be mentioned.

Most importantly, no significant change to public policy will be made by either party, because that might curtail the revenue stream from the oligarchs through the lobbyists to the politicians who have won office in the coming election.

That is the way our oligarchy works.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KaiserJeep', '
')I am going to say this once. I was born in 1951, and I was in Junior High School when the great majority of Climate Scientists were screaming that we were about to induce an Ice Age. They were blaming a wide variety of causes, everything from paving over grasslands to acid rain to algae blooms caused by fertilizer runoffs. Some were even talking about the then new technology high altitude jets - the Boeing 707 was the popular target - destroying the ozone layer and causing the planet to first cloud up worse than Venus, and then freeze.

[dinopello]

It is fun to look back and see what was going on in those days of global cooling

Newsweek - April 28, 1975

Here is Scientific American's Take on it in 2014

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]How the "Global Cooling" Story Came to Be

Gwynne was the science editor of Newsweek 39 years ago when he pulled together some interviews from scientists and wrote a nine-paragraph story about how the planet was getting cooler.

Fox News loves to cite it. So does Rush Limbaugh. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., has quoted the story on the Senate floor.

Gwynne, now 72, is a bit chagrinned that from a long career of distinguished science and technology reporting, he is most remembered for this one story.

"When I wrote this story I did not see it as a blockbuster," Gwynne recalled. "It was just an intriguing piece about what a certain group in a certain niche of climatology was thinking."

And, revisionist lore aside, it was hardly a cover story. It was a one-page article on page 64. It was, Gwynne concedes, written with a bit of over-ventilated style that sometimes marked the magazine's prose: "There are ominous signs the earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically..." the piece begins, and warns of a possible "dramatic decline in food production."

And, Gwynne protested: "I wrote this in 1975!"

[KaiserJeep]

I knew you flaming reality deniers would jump right on this, and use as your evidence the virtual reality of the internet.

Nor was it something I just heard, nor was it a single source. We spent four days discussing the topic in Science class, and it was all over the popular press, Walter Cronkite mentioned the "controversial theory", and even our parents had heard of it.

I even told you how you would react, and you did. But obviously, you never thought about it. Maybe some of the readers of this thread will actually think rather than reflexively act.

One can hope. One can hope that reality still has a place in the world, and cannot be altered in real time. It is far from certain.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KaiserJeep', 'I') knew you flaming reality deniers would jump right on this, and use as your evidence the virtual reality of the internet.

I even told you you would do so, and you did. But obviously, you never thought about it. Maybe some of the readers of this thread will actually think rather than reflexively act.

One can hope.

[KaiserJeep]

Just because you read something on the internet, and can still link to it, does not make that thing true.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KaiserJeep', 'J')ust because you read something on the internet, and can still link to it, does not make that thing true.

[KaiserJeep]

Because I was there, I experienced what I am talking about first hand, I was scared by it, and I have never forgotten the circumstances or the reporting of the pending crisis. Which was all BS as it turned out, even though it was prevailing opinion - and now is just an inconvenient incident that the scientists involved would like you to forget ever happened.

It was a valuable lesson in objective reality. It was the first time I realized that words in print could not be trusted. A lesson that none of you who are still protesting have yet learned.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KaiserJeep', 'B')ecause I was there, I experienced what I am talking about first hand, I was scared by it, and I have never forgotten the circumstances or the reporting of the pending crisis. Which was all BS as it turned out, even though it was prevailing opinion - and now is just an inconvenient incident that the scientists involved would like you to forget ever happened.

It was a valuable lesson in objective reality. It was the first time I realized that words in print could not be trusted. A lesson that none of you who are still protesting have yet learned.

[KaiserJeep]

That was a good dozen years after the period I was in JHS, which was 1963-64. Which was when the popular media was reporting it, when Walter Cronkite commented on it, and when it made the rounds as dinner party conversation.

Which period is not even covered in the document you linked. Nor were any of the papers referenced even written then.

Clear miss on your part.