Global Warming.

[The.Menace]

what makes you think someone had to tell me this? any new article that comes out on the issue, from the u.k., europe, to north america i read. i have based my opinions on the matter from many different articles i have read from many different media outlets that lean left and right. not wikipedia, which is constantly edited by the same people that hang out on moveon.org and dailykos all day.

U don't act as if u'd know. U read pretty much every articel that comes out and still think there are more scientist that say global warning is a joke? .... Come on. Then tell me, why is the IPCC not relevant? Is it all a lie too, made up by scientists from different countries? Why would they lie though, 2 diss GW?

 

[PuffnScruff]

because the IPCC even has scientists the don't agree with the findings of other scientists within the IPCC

oh an it's the UN. i mean really, the UN. the same UN that sends a team to investigate the deaths of some monkeys in africa. the same UN that is corrupt as all fucking hell. oil for food scandal?

and they have even downgraded their original findings so....

 

[PuffnScruff]

Ask yourself - this is your proof that it's all a lie? Jesus.

you have missed the point. i asked what kind of scientist doesn't want to have a debate on the issue. if they dont want to have a debate then that is a little fishy?

That's horseshit, unless you consider anything left of Fox News, which was created for the purpose of pushing the Republican agenda, to be liberally biased.

if you truely believe that the most of the media in our country, and others as well, is not liberally biased and has been for decades then you are far more left than i thought. even blind maybe? there have been many studies that even show how liberal the midea biasness is. it was actually fox that brough somewhat of a balance to the media, thus creating the fox effect. before fox came along when a show host on cnn brought people on to discuss an issue it was generally 70-80% of the time two people from the left. that isnt fair or balanced now is it?

i will admit that the old gray lady (nyt) and cnn and a few others have been shifting a bit as of lately in their op-ed, political slant, and the shows they have

 

[PuffnScruff]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nosplit/nwarm05.xml

here is a good read. notice the quote from Jacques Chirac about how global warming is being used to create a global government.

 

[The.Menace]

because the IPCC even has scientists the don't agree with the findings of other scientists within the IPCC

So there are critical scientist within the IPCC organisation and still they come to a certain conclusion posted above - that should worry u.

i asked what kind of scientist doesn't want to have a debate on the issue. if they dont want to have a debate then that is a little fishy?

So you're talkin about Al Gore and that's about it? He's not a scientist first of all, second just u don't like him is no proof that there is no men made climate change, there is more than one movie about that topic. I didn't even see his movie.

See what I found on wiki.

In a way, it is one of the strengths of the IPCC to be very conservative and cautious and not overstate any climate change risk

– Stefan Rahmstorf[

So your argument is that all this climate change talk is a lie from the left wing media?

 

[Sebastian]

Fuck it, i know mankind is the problem and everyone who has got another opinion is a fucking idiot.

 

[AmerikazMost]

you have missed the point. i asked what kind of scientist doesn't want to have a debate on the issue. if they dont want to have a debate then that is a little fishy?


if you truely believe that the most of the media in our country, and others as well, is not liberally biased and has been for decades then you are far more left than i thought. even blind maybe? there have been many studies that even show how liberal the midea biasness is. it was actually fox that brough somewhat of a balance to the media, thus creating the fox effect. before fox came along when a show host on cnn brought people on to discuss an issue it was generally 70-80% of the time two people from the left. that isnt fair or balanced now is it?

i will admit that the old gray lady (nyt) and cnn and a few others have been shifting a bit as of lately in their op-ed, political slant, and the shows they have

If by liberally biased you mean socially progressive, then yes, I agree. Most of the country tends to be that way, regardless of how many people identify themselves as conservatives (I recommend a book by one of my professors, James Stimson, where he discusses a large portion of the population that is symbolically conservative, yet operationally liberal).

When it comes to elections and government, it always sways with the times. Back in 2000, I barely remember hearing ANYTHING positive about Al Gore--or even in 2004 most was anti-Kerry--and now of course everything is anti-Bush.

As far as politics are concerned, most media outlets encourage a smaller government that does more. Irony.

 

[PuffnScruff]

So there are critical scientist within the IPCC organisation and still they come to a certain conclusion posted above - that should worry u.


So you're talkin about Al Gore and that's about it? He's not a scientist first of all, second just u don't like him is no proof that there is no men made climate change, there is more than one movie about that topic. I didn't even see his movie.

See what I found on wiki.



So your argument is that all this climate change talk is a lie from the left wing media?

i said i believe it is a cylce, i said i don't believe it is all man kinds fault, and i said the science is not exactlly all in or conclusive since there are many scientists, some of the leading scientists, that don't agree on the issue. i never said the affects can't be seen or we won't see them in the future.

i am not talking about al gore. i know he is not a scientist. ther are real scientists that have writtne articles calling for other scientists that do not agree with them on the issue to be shut up and who refuse to debate the ones that don't agree with the man made global warming charge. there have been many articles about that, that has come out this year. if i was refering to al gore i would have said al gore.

you missed the point again on the biased media. the point is that if you have a biased media that tends to lean to one directions, and the heads that run those media companies are buddies with and in the pockets of politicians and tend to think the same way on political issues, then don't you think they will tend do favors for those politicians and distort the truth in favor for those political causes

 

[PuffnScruff]

If by liberally biased you mean socially progressive, then yes, I agree. Most of the country tends to be that way, regardless of how many people identify themselves as conservatives (I recommend a book by one of my professors, James Stimson, where he discusses a large portion of the population that is symbolically conservative, yet operationally liberal).

When it comes to elections and government, it always sways with the times. Back in 2000, I barely remember hearing ANYTHING positive about Al Gore--or even in 2004 most was anti-Kerry--and now of course everything is anti-Bush.

As far as politics are concerned, most media outlets encourage a smaller government that does more. Irony.

i could recommond a few books from Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News by Bernard Goldberg, a liberal, to South Park Conservative and bunch more.

that whole left talk about how the media is "progressive" is bullshit george soros propaganda. and don't tell me he doesn't have an impact on the media because he has been quoted in interviews talking about how he spends 100's of millions of dollars to sway the public on social issues for his party

 

[AmerikazMost]

i could recommond a few books from Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News by Bernard Goldberg, a liberal, to South Park Conservative and bunch more.

that whole left talk about how the media is "progressive" is bullshit george soros propaganda. and don't tell me he doesn't have an impact on the media because he has been quoted in interviews talking about how he spends 100's of millions of dollars to sway the public on social issues for his party

No television station or newspaper is going to be completely impartial. Individuals have biases, and always will. My contention was that most news sources reflect the point of views of most of the population. How else do you explain discrepencies such as negative attitudes towards raising taxes and positive attitudes towards social security and other such services?

The problem is not the media itself, but how individuals make their conclusions from it.

My question to you would then be: From where do you get your news? And do you consider those sources to be partial or impartial?

 

[PuffnScruff]

where do i get my news? these places...
AP
ANANOVA
BLOOMBERG
BUSINESS WIRE
DOW JONES
EFE
INDO-ASIAN NEWS SERVICE
INTERFAX
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC WIRE
ITAR-TASS
KYODO
MCCLATCHY [DC]
PRAVDA
PRESS ASSOCIATION
PR NEWSWIRE
[SHOWBIZ] PR WIRE
SCRIPPS HOWARD
US INFO WIRE
U.S. NEWSWIRE
WENN SHOWBIZ
XINHUA
ABCNEWS
ABCNEWS THE NOTE
ACCESS HOLLYWOOD
AD AGE DEADLINE
BBC
BBC AUDIO
BILLBOARD
BOSTON GLOBE
BOSTON HERALD
BROADCASTING & CABLE
CBS NEWS
C-SPAN SCHEDULE
CHICAGO TRIB
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
CNN
CNN POLITICAL TICKER
CNN TRANSCRIPTS
DAILY VARIETY
D.C. DAYBOOK
E!
ECONOMIST
EDITOR & PUBLISHER
EMIRATES TODAY
EMERGENCY NET
EMPIRE [MOVIES]
ENT WEEKLY
FINANCIAL TIMES
FORBES MAG
FOX NEWS
GAWKER
HELLO!
HILL
H'WOOD REPORTER
HUFFINGTON POST
HUMAN EVENTS
IAFRICA
INSIGHT MAG
INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIB
INVEST BUS DAILY
JERUSALEM POST
JEWISH WORLD REVIEW
LA DAILY NEWS
LA TIMES
LEXISNEXIS NEWS
LUCIANNE.COM
MEDIA CHECK
MEDIA LIFE
MEDIA WEEK
MSNBC
MSNBC FIRST READ
MUCHMUSIC
NATION
NATIONAL ENQUIRER
NATIONAL REVIEW
NEW REPUBLIC
NEW YORK
NY DAILY NEWS
NY OBSERVER
NY POST
NY TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSBUSTERS
NEWSBYTES
NEWSMAX
NEWSWEEK
N. KOREAN NEWS
PEOPLE MAG
PHILLY INQUIRER
PHILLY DAILY NEWS
POLITICO
R & R
REASON MAG
ROLL CALL
ROLLING STONE
SAN FRAN CHRON
SKY NEWS
SLATE: PAPERS
SMOKING GUN
SPLASH NEWS
STAR
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD
TIME MAG
TMZ
TELEVISIONWEEK
TV SHOPTALK
[U.K.] DAILY MAIL
[U.K.] DAILY MIRROR
DAILY RECORD
[U.K.] EVENING STANDARD
[U.K.] EXPRESS
[U.K.] GUARDIAN
[U.K.] INDEPENDENT
[U.K.] LONDON PAPER
[U.K.] NEWS OF THE WORLD
[U.K.] STAR
[U.K.] SUN
[U.K.] TELEGRAPH
[U.K.] TIMES
US NEWS
USA TODAY
VILLAGE VOICE
WASH POST
WASH TIMES
THE WEEK
WEEKLY STANDARD
WORLDNETDAILY
X17

2nd question, it all depends on the people behind the article, not just the person writting it

 

[AmerikazMost]

where do i get my news? these places...
AP
ANANOVA
BLOOMBERG
BUSINESS WIRE
DOW JONES
EFE
INDO-ASIAN NEWS SERVICE
INTERFAX
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC WIRE
ITAR-TASS
KYODO
MCCLATCHY [DC]
PRAVDA
PRESS ASSOCIATION
PR NEWSWIRE
[SHOWBIZ] PR WIRE
SCRIPPS HOWARD
US INFO WIRE
U.S. NEWSWIRE
WENN SHOWBIZ
XINHUA
ABCNEWS
ABCNEWS THE NOTE
ACCESS HOLLYWOOD
AD AGE DEADLINE
BBC
BBC AUDIO
BILLBOARD
BOSTON GLOBE
BOSTON HERALD
BROADCASTING & CABLE
CBS NEWS
C-SPAN SCHEDULE
CHICAGO TRIB
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
CNN
CNN POLITICAL TICKER
CNN TRANSCRIPTS
DAILY VARIETY
D.C. DAYBOOK
E!
ECONOMIST
EDITOR & PUBLISHER
EMIRATES TODAY
EMERGENCY NET
EMPIRE [MOVIES]
ENT WEEKLY
FINANCIAL TIMES
FORBES MAG
FOX NEWS
GAWKER
HELLO!
HILL
H'WOOD REPORTER
HUFFINGTON POST
HUMAN EVENTS
IAFRICA
INSIGHT MAG
INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIB
INVEST BUS DAILY
JERUSALEM POST
JEWISH WORLD REVIEW
LA DAILY NEWS
LA TIMES
LEXISNEXIS NEWS
LUCIANNE.COM
MEDIA CHECK
MEDIA LIFE
MEDIA WEEK
MSNBC
MSNBC FIRST READ
MUCHMUSIC
NATION
NATIONAL ENQUIRER
NATIONAL REVIEW
NEW REPUBLIC
NEW YORK
NY DAILY NEWS
NY OBSERVER
NY POST
NY TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSBUSTERS
NEWSBYTES
NEWSMAX
NEWSWEEK
N. KOREAN NEWS
PEOPLE MAG
PHILLY INQUIRER
PHILLY DAILY NEWS
POLITICO
R & R
REASON MAG
ROLL CALL
ROLLING STONE
SAN FRAN CHRON
SKY NEWS
SLATE: PAPERS
SMOKING GUN
SPLASH NEWS
STAR
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD
TIME MAG
TMZ
TELEVISIONWEEK
TV SHOPTALK
[U.K.] DAILY MAIL
[U.K.] DAILY MIRROR
DAILY RECORD
[U.K.] EVENING STANDARD
[U.K.] EXPRESS
[U.K.] GUARDIAN
[U.K.] INDEPENDENT
[U.K.] LONDON PAPER
[U.K.] NEWS OF THE WORLD
[U.K.] STAR
[U.K.] SUN
[U.K.] TELEGRAPH
[U.K.] TIMES
US NEWS
USA TODAY
VILLAGE VOICE
WASH POST
WASH TIMES
THE WEEK
WEEKLY STANDARD
WORLDNETDAILY
X17

2nd question, it all depends on the people behind the article, not just the person writting it

LOL I was looking more for a self-analysis than evidence.

 

[_carmi]

i love this thread. this is interesting.

 

[AmerikazMost]

i love this thread. this is interesting.

thanks for contributing to it

 

[The.Menace]

i said i believe it is a cylce, i said i don't believe it is all man kinds fault

So you're sayin that it's mankinds fault 2 a certain extent?

Do you agree that there is more CO2 in the atmosphere than ever before and that this fact is men made?

you missed the point again on the biased media. the point is that if you have a biased media that tends to lean to one directions, and the heads that run those media companies are buddies with and in the pockets of politicians and tend to think the same way on political issues, then don't you think they will tend do favors for those politicians and distort the truth in favor for those political causes

I missed a point?I don't think so....what does the media have 2 do with the climate change, nothing - and since I don't get my informations from the media, those 'biased media' how u call it don't have an effect on my opionion. Biased or not, it doesn't proof that climate change isn't men's fault.

And yes, I did read your article and well, good read - I don't really think so. It's not a proof it's just a read and it's just a newspaper. I don't agree with many things that he says so well, it's just an opinion (I don't agree with) and far far away from beein a proof for anything.

 

[Jeremy]

Puffy thinks scientist have something to gain by lying about global warming. Like the white house hasn't be censoring scientific facts about global warming for years. This is what happens to children of bush supporters. lol.

 

[_carmi]

thanks for contributing to it

i did contribute a bit earlier but i was just stating this type of threads is interesting cause its a debate and it brings out some knowledge.

 

[PuffnScruff]

So you're sayin that it's mankinds fault 2 a certain extent?

.

i think i already said i do

Puffy thinks scientist have something to gain by lying about global warming. Like the white house hasn't be censoring scientific facts about global warming for years. This is what happens to children of bush supporters. lol.

and what does al gore say that they censored?

how do you think scientists get money? of course any scientist on either side of the issue can gain about lying on global warming,

 

[The.Menace]

i think i already said i do

no u didn't but I'm glad you said u do think this way.

 

[PuffnScruff]

no u didn't but I'm glad you said u do think this way.

i said it in post 22