The climate change movement: July 28, 1995 to August 14, 2020 RIP

[oil pan 4]

I'll listen to the whole thing twice only because the main stream media is in full meltdown over it.
I figure I will be like reading a global warming report. The mainstream media will cry out "we only have 12 years left" within an hour of the report being released. Then I spend days reading hundreds and hundreds of pages and see no cause for alarm.
Makes me think they didn't even look it, and spent mmore time writing about how the sky is falling then they did reading the report about how the sky is falling.

[freebeard]

The mainstream media will cry out "we only have 12 years left" within an hour of the report being released. Then I spend days reading hundreds and hundreds of pages and see no cause for alarm.

The thing that's different today is that AI can absorb things like Congressional bills in seconds that need to be voted on immediately, and answer any questions you have about them.

The question I would have asked is how the Russians feel about the Han peoples (their neighbors) vs the CCP. They rejected communism 30-plus years ago.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

The thing that's different today is that AI can absorb things like Congressional bills in seconds that need to be voted on immediately, and answer any questions you have about them.

Don't need AI to inform any conscious person that a bill is corrupt when they come as omnibus pork barrel spending "opportunities", and the name of the bill is the thing least addressed in it.

Why Americans don't fire them all, is beyond anything I can comprehend. Gluttons for punishment is all I can come to.

[freebeard]

Don't need AI to inform any conscious person that a bill is corrupt when they come as omnibus pork barrel spending "opportunities", and the name of the bill is the thing least addressed in it.

Knowing is one thing, offering rebuttal is another.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Knowing is one thing, offering rebuttal is another.

My rebuttal to stupid (or corrupt) is "don't".

[freebeard]

Do you whisper "Don't" three times?

[aerohead]

After 12-years of legal battle, a couple of operatives for the fossil-fuel lobby have been convicted of defamation, and will be required to pony up $1,000,000 in damages to climatologist Michael Mann, for defaming him, and particularly in respect to his 'inconvenient' hockey-stick extrapolation for planetary warming as a function of atmospheric greenhouse gas loading.
And doubly embarrassing to climate deniers, is the realization that, climate sensitivity is now known to actually be WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY worse than predicted, and we're on our way to 'nearer' term human extinction.

[redpoint5]

That sounds like fake news. Who were the operatives, why were they paid to defame Mike Mann, and how was he materially injured from those actions?

[freebeard]

duckduckgo.com/?q=micheal+mann+hockey+stick&iar=news&ia=news

It's prolly in there somewhere.

[redpoint5]

As I suspected, fake news.

No lobbyists are mentioned whatsoever, which is why 2 individual bloggers are being sued instead of a lobbyist group or other organization. Seems Mann has a history of continually suing just to see what sticks.

This isn’t Mr. Mann’s first legal rodeo. In 2011 he sued geographer Tim Ball in
Canadian court for saying in an interview that “Michael Mann at Penn State
should be in the state pen, not Penn State.” In 2019 a Canadian judge dismissed the charges because of the “inexcusable” delay in the trial and ordered Mr. Mann to pay Ball’s legal costs. But news reports say Mr. Mann never paid, and Ball died
in 2022.

Michael Mann, a professor of meteorology at Penn State University and co-author of the well-known “hockey-stick graph” about global warming, sued the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Review magazine for defamation when they published articles accusing him of “molesting” the data.

Here's what the 2 individuals said that somehow is being considered legal defamation;

"molesting and torturing data in the service of politicized science, engaging in data manipulation, and creating the fraudulent climate-change 'hockey-stick' graph."

Apparently if I make a critical comment about a public figure I can be sued for a million dollars. This is not a good precedent to set. It will not stand up in supreme court, because that court will preserve the 1st amendment; the very thing neo-authoritarians attack the most.