Fake News demanding censorship of anyone that questions their propaganda
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (23)
sorted by:
Looks like faceberg really is unfairly targeting the retarded.
What do mean, clearly the earth has no weather/s
(this is from the UK’s BBC News)
edit - here is the north korean style attempt at thought policing :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/59147659
You haven't demonstrated that "liberal capitalism" is the root of these problems, yet you invoke (Marxist villain systems) to associate that method of control with them. I'm not sure we need to invoke any imaginary systems. It seems to me that tyranny and corruption are just natural outcomes when you have a decadent society with an uneducated populace and no uniting moral code, that depend on some government or psuedo-government (megacorporation) entity to provide for them rather than being self-sufficient.
Meanwhile North Korea is a literal despotic dictatorship with no freedom of speech, so it's a good villain to point to when arguing for freedom of speech.
I think the guy just invoked North Korea because he's angry. Not everything is a rhetorical war. I think people here are smart enough to recognize commie blackpill propaganda when they see it and move on.
I certainly wouldn't try to argue that we've ever had true "free speech" anywhere. It's just an idyllic virtue. We got the closest humanity's ever been in the late 90's / early 2000's and then the crabs in the bucket pulled everyone back down - to the point that free speech is no longer even an ideal. I blame globalism. But there are logical reasons for it being a "good thing', and at least that its downsides are outweighed by its upsides. For one thing, I doubt a paradise of government by the worker for the workers could ever stand up to the scrutiny of free speech without shameless use of aggression.
I do have MacIntyre on my reading list already. :)
Please post archives for sites like these. Especially sites as big as the BBC. https://archive.md/YUeao
👌
>BBC News
>News
actually according to the article this is nothing less than a "BBC reality check"
Anyone who has spent any time in Indonesia knows the flooding is because there is a wet season and due to a lack of planning controls people build so that watercourses and rivers are impinged, leading to floods. Plus Jakarta is sinking and there have been insufficient civil works to manage the water table since the Dutch left. It's not "linked" to cLiMaTe ChAnGe.
I am just wondering what are these journalists (majority white women?) think they're doing with their lives spouting this clear bullshit - they know it is dumb. What do they think after a day of work? "I wrote another propaganda piece, good job me"?
You're giving them too much credit, they don't actually know anything. They just type the words they know to type to get the rewards they want.
Research climategate
This whole bullshit is about denying energy self sufficiency to countries who have fossil fuels, specially coal so the evil empire can sell them natural gas & hold them by the balls.
Biden this week stated that he will speak with OPEC+ so they are persuaded to produce more oil. We are not the morons they think we are.
Does anyone have any link to the older stories from when The NY Times or wapo editors were caught saying they were going to pivot to climate change after Trump?
https://nypost.com/2021/04/13/cnns-charlie-chester-says-network-peddled-anti-trump-propaganda/
During one of the meetings with his “date,” Chester talked about how CNN also targeted anti-Trump voters by focusing on climate change, adding “fear sells.”
“I think there’s a COVID fatigue. So, like whenever a new story comes up, they’re [CNN’s] going to latch onto it. They’ve already announced in our office that once the public is — will be open to it — we’re going to start focusing mainly on climate,” Chester said.
“It’s going to be our [CNN’s] focus. Like our focus was to get Trump out of office, right? Without saying it, that’s what it was, right? So our next thing is going to be climate change awareness,” he added.
Charlie Chester, a technical Director at CNN, says the network’s goal was “to be climate change awareness," following President Donald Trump’s election loss. Charlie Chester, a technical Director at CNN, says the network’s goal was “to be climate change awareness,” following President Donald Trump’s election loss. Project Veritas ”What’s that look like?” Chester was asked.
“I don’t know. I’m not sure. I have a feeling that it’s going to be like, constantly showing videos of decline in ice, and weather warming up, and like the effects it’s having on the economy,” Chester said.
Asked who makes that decision, he said the “head of the network,” referring to Jeff Zucker.
They ban or censor you for criticizing blm, vaccines and lgbt. They surely can do the same for climate bullshit.
I'm going to repost my reply to a climate credulist in another thread that was saying NASA has temps for the last 140 years and they are going up.
And prior to the 20th century it's almost exclusively ground temps in the United States and until the late 20th century it was almost exclusively ground temps in the United States and Europe. And it doesn't actually show any significant net warming until it's run through pairwise homogeneity software which removes "bias" which just happens to equal the amount of warming measured over that time period. Odd.
Oh, shit, look it's NASA https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1999/1999_Hansen_ha03200f.pdf
So, check Figure 4, 5 and 6 (page 37). Now notice Figure 6 for the United States temps, which I remind you is the only temps they have long term data for. No net warming. Figure 4 and Figure 5 shows net warming but that data doesn't exist; it's modeled. Now if you look at a newer NASA graph of US temperature it will show the same data with an upward trend added. That's not from measurement; it's from PH. There's literally no net warming that has every been measured; it's all data science voodoo.
The unadjusted data from 1999 shows faster warming from 1880 to 1940 than from 1970 to 1999. Pre-1940 carbon was pretty negligible so what caused the warming? Climate science is a fucking scam. Without adjustments there is no warming; it would be more scientific to believe that CO2 concentration causes the NOAA to adjust temperatures because the measured temp doesn't follow CO2 but the net adjustment to temperature follows it almost perfectly.
MUH WEATHER
Losing any sympathy for the suckers that continue to believe the obvious lies
Text below a picture of waist high floods.
Because as we all know, there definitely weren't any waist high floods in Indonesia until recently. 🙄
Not saying that alone proves the climate cult is wrong, obviously. It's just that they always point to a few incidents without providing any context or comparison data.