Jump to content

'Do your own research / I do my own research' has become code for conspiracy theory followers


Jingthing

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Everyone who wanted to keep working in MSM, and wanted to keep their generous pensions.

That's the same as claiming that tens of thousands of climate scientists world wide are faking research because they don't want to lose government grants.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

I would have faked research if the money was right.

Wouldn't you?

Many of those scientists are just on a salary and all of them have to produce peer reviewed work to get published and credibility. It just isn't that simple and you are accusing tens of thousands of scientists of being profoundly corrupt. What are the odds of that being true? Then what happened to the other tens of thousands of scientists who would have called that research into question? Your version of the way science works is rather simplistic I must say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Many of those scientists are just on a salary and all of them have to produce peer reviewed work to get published and credibility. It just isn't that simple and you are accusing tens of thousands of scientists of being profoundly corrupt. What are the odds of that being true? Then what happened to the other tens of thousands of scientists who would have called that research into question? Your version of the way science works is rather simplistic I must say.

It could be, he's just following the money, as he sees it. In a way, we all do the same, the alternative is almost starvation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Khabib said:

It could be, he's just following the money, as he sees it. In a way, we all do the same, the alternative is almost starvation.

The statistical probability that every climate scientists (and not other scientists) are just faking it for the money is impossibly small. Or maybe vaccine scientists are too, I dunno. The mind boggles. Even harder to understand is how rational people believe it's true, like most other conspiracy theories. How did McInerney get to spout obvious lies on a Hannity show?

Edited by ozimoron
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

The statistical probability that every climate scientists (and not other scientists) are just faking it for the money is impossibly small. Or maybe vaccine scientists are too, I dunno. The mind boggles.

Heres an interesting one, what the statistical probability of a room of 20 people, 2 of them sharing the same birthday. That may not be an exact quote of the thing, but very close. The answer is very surprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Khabib said:

Heres an interesting one, what the statistical probability of a room of 20 people, 2 of them sharing the same birthday. That may not be an exact quote of the thing, but very close. The answer is very surprising.

That isn't anything like tens of thousands of scientists in a hundred countries all in cahoots. Not on the same planet really ????

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Many of those scientists are just on a salary and all of them have to produce peer reviewed work to get published and credibility. It just isn't that simple and you are accusing tens of thousands of scientists of being profoundly corrupt. What are the odds of that being true? Then what happened to the other tens of thousands of scientists who would have called that research into question? Your version of the way science works is rather simplistic I must say.

Michael Mann ...... peer reviewed hockey stick.

Almost got jailed for fraud, and he (almost single handedly) started the whole climate change fraud.

 

Where were the tens of thousands of scientists calling his research into question?

All I ever heard were 99% of scientists reached consensus.

And Mann still refuses to show how he acquired his data.

What happened to all your supposed checks with him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

the whole climate change fraud

Spot on. Although, this years 49.4 C in Lytton British Columbia & Friday night's eighty plus tornado cluster, one growler touching down, moving, for over 300 km were strange anomalies. climate change is looking more fraudulent than ever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LomSak27 said:

Spot on. Although, this years 49.4 C in Lytton British Columbia & Friday night's eighty plus tornado cluster, one growler touching down, moving, for over 300 km were strange anomalies. climate change is looking more fraudulent than ever. 

The tornadoes were stronger and more irregular because of a break down in the gulf stream caused by climate change. This is readily accessible and peer reviewed research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Michael Mann ...... peer reviewed hockey stick.

Almost got jailed for fraud, and he (almost single handedly) started the whole climate change fraud.

 

Where were the tens of thousands of scientists calling his research into question?

All I ever heard were 99% of scientists reached consensus.

And Mann still refuses to show how he acquired his data.

What happened to all your supposed checks with him?

Mann was never charged with anything and totally vindicated. It should not be forgotten that the graph showed a sharp rise in temperatures in the 20th century, a phenomen which has been totally proved beyond any shadow of doubt.

 

The board of inquiry at Pennsylvania State University said it found no evidence that Michael Mann, a leading climatologist, had suppressed or falsified data, tried to destroy data or emails, or misused information. The panel dismissed the charge. "The so-called 'trick' was nothing more than a statistical method used to bring two or more different kinds of data sets together in a legitimate fashion by a technique that has been reviewed by a broad array of peers in the field," the panel said.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/03/climate-scientist-michael-mann

Edited by ozimoron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I would have faked research if the money was right.

Wouldn't you?

 

Thread topic, do your own research.

But it's impossible for anyone to do their own research as all reliable information sources are edited to remove any uncomfortable/inconvenient facts.

Man made climate change is for real. Every country on the planet (except Syria and the USA when Republicans are in charge) or on board. 
google: ‘fossil fuel propaganda’ to see why so many are ignorant on the subject. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

 

Every country on the planet (except Syria and the USA when Republicans are in charge) or on board. 

 

 China alone generated about the same amount of CO2 as the next four countries combined. And its carbon output is still rising every year.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-china-climate-change-biggest-carbon-polluters/

Edited by EVENKEEL
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

interesting that China's population is 4 times that of the USA and yet produces double the co2 emissions and half the per capita rate of the USA.

 

In fact, China produces less CO2 per capita then almost every developed nation. Exceptions are France and the UK who produce much of their electricity from nuclear power plants.

 

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/

Edited by ozimoron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Now expend that snapshot to the past 100 years and let see who has contributed the most CO2 an has caused global warming.

Do you think the Chinese are stupid? The western powers developed their dominance over decades of a carbon based economy. and now that he Chinese are doing the same we ask them to stop. How about they stop  after they reached our own levels of CO2 measured in decades?  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's another code word for the OP.  Whenever someone refers to the MSM as "fake news" or otherwise unreliable, they are most likely a right wing, QAnon believing, cult following, delusional, certifiable nutbag.  And since they are typically Trump supporters, you can add "serial loser"......5555 

  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2021 at 7:02 PM, ozimoron said:

That's the same as claiming that tens of thousands of climate scientists world wide are faking research because they don't want to lose government grants.

Well, it’s proven that they are doing that. Looking at weather data over short periods, distortion to suit their political paymasters.
 

MSM for basic News & Opinion. 
Wikipedia for Facts to form your own Opinion. 
 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old school professional accessible impartial balanced journalism long gone.ergo no MSM or any media can be trusted to present proper facts without substantial bias and distortion.
News and Opinion are not necessarily inclusive of balanced impartial  critical Facts. 
Example: “study” finds nothing bad to say about Hitler or Fascism.

study sample turns out to be eight Nazis hiding out in Brazil funded by KKK. So “peer review” then selective and distorted. Similar practices for “ climate change” ……all political games and money ….  
 

Just as you should not get Insurance advice from Banks, NEVER listen to Politicians on Health or Education. Yes it’s their Business but they simply cannot be trusted to advise or act properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Berkshire said:

There's another code word for the OP.  Whenever someone refers to the MSM as "fake news" or otherwise unreliable, they are most likely a right wing, QAnon believing, cult following, delusional, certifiable nutbag.  And since they are typically Trump supporters, you can add "serial loser"......5555 

Indeed.

But that one is probably more obvious than the do your own research thing at least to people paying attention.

 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-tweet-echo-mein-kampf/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TropicalGuy said:

Well, it’s proven that they are doing that. Looking at weather data over short periods, distortion to suit their political paymasters.
 

MSM for basic News & Opinion. 
Wikipedia for Facts to form your own Opinion. 
 

If 10,000 climate change researchers that tells you it’s only about politics and money….engage top 100 with rest looking at solving hunger, poverty,  war, crime ..  oh but wait, no money there……

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TropicalGuy said:

If 10,000 climate change researchers that tells you it’s only about politics and money….engage top 100 with rest looking at solving hunger, poverty,  war, crime ..  oh but wait, no money there……

You forgot disease. Oh wait, there's money there. Where's the money in climate research? Government grants, please list some of these lucrative cash cows. If anything there's money in producing pseudo science for fossil fuel companies. Giant frauds like carbon capture and storage schemes.

 

https://www.crikey.com.au/2019/11/20/carbon-capture-storage-fossil-fuels/

 

https://reneweconomy.com.au/carbon-captures-litany-of-failures-laid-bare-in-new-report/

 

Here's some of the lucrative cash handouts for climate denier scientists.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/13/peabody-energy-coal-mining-climate-change-denial-funding

 

https://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/06/13114/peabody-coal-bankruptcy-reveals-extensive-funding-climate-denial-network

Edited by ozimoron
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...