Normies have started turning against him lol

Why aren't you buying into one half of the meaningless MSM false dichotomy? What are you, intelligent? Fuck off, liberal commie terrorist.

look I'm delighted that this guy pointed out the leftist anti-GMO and anti-medicine stances are silly, but the magnitude of their impact is not even close to what global warming denial has done to this country

Don't worry, Ahmed, Carlos and Jamal will cut your throat before you live long enough to feel the effects of global warming on your daily life.

clinton is more of a hawk than trump dude
anyway, how is stoking the racism fire going to make muslim terrorism less likely?

Read "Aliens Cause Global Warming". I'm serious.

stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Crichton2003.pdf

...

michael crichton is a bit of a nut. he's made some fair points in the past and this paper, points that I agree with (e.g. secondhand smoke hysteria is almost completely unjustified, the scientific community can be stubborn and stupid and lock out dissenters) but the fundamental thesis of this paper is a retarded straw man.
the drake equation doesn't have scientific value on its own, no scientist says that, the whole point is that it tells you what shit you have to know to make a decent estimate. Of course some quantities are difficult to know precisely, this is why any serious model projections are presented with margins of error! And such models are absolutely falsifiable, all you have to do is compare them to reality! Models ARE science, we just don't talk about the successful ones as models any more. Gravity is a model. Momentum is a model. Logistic growth is a model. These models work and they're really fucking important to the function of the modern world! Hell, in the past 20 years we've actually gotten pretty fucking good at predicting the weather! So this thesis of his, this idea that models can't be trusted at all, is complete nonsense.
Comparing the predictions of an entire research community to those of one or two men (Paul Erlich re starvation, Carl Sagan re nuclear winter) is also a laughable straw man.
what's really dangerous about Crichton's reasoning is he dramatically understates the role of private industry sabotaging any science that affects them, and the role of a skeptic as only to question one side, that of the scientific establishment. the tobacco, oil, finance, and pharmaceutical industries have all muddied the waters with sponsored quack research and political games, and they're the agencies with the most obvious agenda around. So why would you adopt the position of always mistrusting the OTHER guy first?

*was, he's dead now

this.

I think the point of the thing was that politics has infiltrated hard sciences, not to the extent of all of the humanities but, it's still present and has a liberal bias.

define 'liberal bias'
also if that was his only point, I wouldn't object to it as much. he also made the point that
which like I said is downright nonsense. If you think something really bad is going to happen unless some new technology saves you just in time, that doesn't mean the correct strategy is to do nothing and wait for that magic technology! Mass starvation probably WOULD have occurred without the green revolution! If Norman Borlaug hadn't been worried about mass starvation the green revolution never would have happened!

you may be interested in this takedown of that guy crichton had a hard-on for
realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/bjorn-lomborg-just-a-scientist-with-a-different-opinion/

She'll keep on bombing the mudshits, sure, and importing spics, niggers and dune coons all along.

How is bombing not going to?

And there wouldn't be a terrorist "problem" if the leftists hadn't flooded the West with them.

Stay mad, cuck.

I don't like clinton either, I don't want to bomb them
there wouldn't be a terrorist problem if we hadn't intentionally destabilized all of their attempts at self-governance to further our own commercial interests. shit, there isn't even that much of a terrorist problem now, more people die from dysentery every year in the US than from terrorist attacks

you say this as though the people who want to stop the muzzy hordes are the same people who started this mess and if not then some sort of "we aren't allowed to fix our mistakes" limpwristed bullshitery. muslims are trash and they need to be put in the fucking bin.

But it was leftist windbags like you that kept on cheering when Iraq and Afghanistan got "liberated", it was cucks like you that championed the "Arab Spring" and kpet shouting MUH DEMOCRACY like the idiots you are.

Truth of the matter is that the mudshits can only be kept under control with a brutal dictatorship, same as niggers.

Have you ever thought that Trump is practically the leftist candidate in the current run?

Lenin got into power by telling angry low class drones to "take back what is theirs."

Hitler got into power by telling angry low class drones to "take back what is theirs."

Trump is getting into power by telling angry low class drones to "take back what is theirs."

Maybe, instead of being a smug leftist, you should ask yourself why the likes of Hitler get into power time and again and let their goons bash the heads of people like you in.

Because they are low-IQ parasites that need a Great Enemy to distract themselves from self-criticism, and prevent the violent brutes (further riled up by the revolutionist party) from turning on each other.

nope
nope
keep strawmanning though

No. The proles will never revolt, Winston.

He's going to build the wall, Paco. You can't stop him.

What's it like in Narnia this time of year?

Your point?
Are you one of the "literally hitler" crowd?
If so, fuck off.

The humanities were lost to post-modernists/ social marxists completely in the late 90's early 00's and, most administration, department heads, and professors now tend to be liberal. Even stem students have to meet general ed and diversity requirements, that means they have to take courses in humanities where liberal professors can indoctrinate students into their worldview. They will take these views into the stem fields bringing with them a liberal bias. Not all of them will be but, enough to influence the scientific community to be less skeptical of liberal golden calves while avoiding "problematic" inquiries that might go against liberal dogma. That's not even mentioning the fact that all students and many research scientists conduct their work on college campuses, an overwhelmingly liberal environment.

The models do carry the present into the future, they don't account for incremental technological advancements between now and the future slowing or halting any negative human effects. In a model predicting the future based on human actions they can't or don't account for future human counter action so, the model can't be accurate was his point, i think. I don't think he advocated doing nothing and waiting for magic. I think he had a faith in the inventiveness of humanity and felt if global warming exists we can solve it without making it some liberal crusade and browbeating the public with fear. Global warming is sold by liberal politicians and the media to the public as an immediate threat that will destroy us if you don't vote liberal, rather than a log term problem with long term solutions. He recognized the subject was being use as a weapon to coerce people to vote for liberal politicians. That's the point of the speech, science has become too politicized.

I don't give a single tiny shit about global warming. By the time it becomes a true problem, I will already be dead. I don't care what happens to humanity after I die.

you're being tautological
can you actually define for me the precise worldview implied by "liberal bias", and how it would actually affect scientific inquiry? I can tell you from personal experience that people in the sciences, especially the hard sciences, are not "marxists"
oh but they do. they account for use of current mitigation technology, and they make wide margins of error – current climate models are presented in an EXTREMELY conservative way. and even then, the results are downright scary. it's true that they don't account for a miracle, but miracles don't always come, this is survivor bias. There are plenty of times when bad things have happened and they have done crippling damage to the human race – just look at the black plague. if you were dying in bed of cancer you'd still be hoping for some miracle cure, sure, but miracles usually don't happen.
you're also misreading the alignment between climate scientists and the democrats. they'd be more than happy to vote republican if the republicans would listen to what they had to say. the reason things have gotten so polarized is the republicans have completely refused to come to the table.

Are you fucking serious? Yo're a fucking white male!

I thought these were extinct and there are only pansexuals now?

JoJo is for normies who think they aren't normies.

Normal people don't know anything about anime, outside of Dragon Ball.

This person is not a 'normie'

Pick one. JoJo hasn't reached normalfag status like Naruto/Bleach/even OPM.

...

...

How can mirrors be real if our eyes aren't real?

...

awww, he learned a new word and wanted to use it really badly!

Did you live off paint chips as a kid?

Yeah, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that Germany got screwed over after WWI and the kikes were overrepresented among the groups of Marxist agitators threatening Europe.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Revolution_of_1918–19

>>simple.wikipedia.org/

No, d-don't turn against black science man :_;

Nigga, are you on crack?

Hitler got into power by charming wealthy landowners and businessmen, all of whom loved Hitler because they were afraid the Communists were going to come and wreck their shit.

Not future technology compounded over time. We are always inventing, always improving, how do they know what can be or will be 20yrs, 50yrs, or 100ys from now. Not a miracle but decades and centuries of invention and innovation. Even with wide margins of error and being extremely conservative that kind of prediction without taking into account decades or centuries of future technology no model of the distant future of human action can be accurate and, taking future technology into account is impossible. Weather can be predicted weeks away but outside of generalities it cant be predicted months or years away. You can't say it WILL rain this day ten years from now it's too complex a system. How is the future of human innovation any less complex and any more predictable. Crichton said it himself.

I didn't say they were, I wrote they were influenced by and, i also wrote not all of them.

No. Democrats are using scientists to keep themselves in power and to lend themselves the prestige of science.

Yes. They believe the scientific community is in the pocket of the Dems. They bought the Dems propaganda.

I think you're being disingenuous. Unless you've been living under a rock you know what a liberal worldview is.

The conservative definition of liberal bias.

I thought I did.
I think political forces are cowing scientists.

Don't get me wrong none of this coming from the fields themselves or the people in them but from outside political forces. There is not a failing of science, there is an intrusion of politics. That's what Crichton thought and he said as much in that speech.

we've gone 1000 years and more without significant technical advances. Moore's law for transistors has made people way too optimistic about the march of technology – in the same time period as we've gone from ENIAC to the iPhone, a technology as simple as the battery hasn't improved much at all.

I promise you I'm not. I can guess some things that "liberal worldview" is meant to imply but I'm not sure which you're referring to and I'm not at all certain how they would affect scientific inquiry. The only exception that comes to mind is racial science, and I really think that's an exceptional case. "liberal" is a word that usually means what you want it to mean, which is why it's so hard to define. The current Republican establishment are much more economic liberals in the strict sense, e.g. than the Democrats. The current Democrats are probably more socially liberal. But again, I have very little idea what you are suggesting liberal-influenced science would be, outside of the social sciences. Maybe you mean an anti-corporate bias?
I don't think climate scientists are pushed to be more extreme by the Democrats, for what it's worth. Both parties are very much against the implications of climate studies: that we need to curtail economic growth in order to survive. The democratic interpretation has very much softened this, as far as I've seen – Obama cites Ronald fucking Reagan as a positive role model!

I want him to fuck my wife.

Kill yourself.

Wasn't "global warming" just a sensationalist term made up by the media? I remember hearing the actual scientists called it something else.

About damn time.

Well fuck you're right Also rosana's avatar is giving me aids.

Pretty much yeah. I think the more proper term is natural climate change? Not too sure on that one.

You guys are fucking morons.
Ill stick to pol & v.

No. Global warming was what they called it before the globe stopped warming. They keep rebranding it over and over again because it is all a scam. "Global Cooling", "Global Warming", "Climate Change", now "Extreme Weather" whatever, my ass.

'Global Warming' is a Crock of Sh*t

youtube.com/watch?v=silfiTY32xo

...

What a disgusting display of the appeal to authority. Especially when your authority has been caught lying time and time again.

This is what I come to Holla Forums for: to watch two autists battle over the definition of "liberal worldview" on a message board devoted to movies and television.

Also, lol at the user claiming he doesn't know what liberal worldview means. You obviously do. Just think Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Lewontin, and the army of Jewish "scientists" devoted to pushing out endless sophistry to encourage their ideal world, i.e. a multicultural shithole with no white goyim.

gr8 cognitive dissonance fam

what a disgusting straw man
skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

the earth is flat and global warming is a lie

This

You pozzed halfwits need to fuck off back to facebook.

...

it used to be global cooling. in the 70s, people were dumping ash on glaciers to stop a believed iceage.

people are dumb.

The poit of taking a vaccine is that you become immune to the target disease, so you don't need medicine to cure it on the first place. How's that not a form of medication?

Oh, but of course you are told they are good for you, and like the good goy that you are you get them and make sure they are up to date. At least tell me you aren't pathetic enough to get the flu shot every year? How can you actually believe that shit isn't a scam?

Look I've gotten vaccines before, when I didn't know any better, and my parents didn't know any better. Stop living in denial, vaccines are not good for you. They are a means of population control.

Oh, for fuck's sake

fuck you
fuck
you

...

top b8, m8, i r8 it 8/8 on fr8 sk8.

...

Next time don't try so hard with your shilling, otherwise you make it too obvious.

Global warming is the net trend. Overall, the temperature of the Earth has increased over the last hundred years at a rate that would normally have taken many, many thousand of years to occur. However, climate change is a much better phrase for the issue because it encapsulates the danger of weather becoming more extreme all around. More floods, more storms, more droughts. There are also things like the fact that Britain is as far north as Canada, but is kept warm by an ocean current travelling up the atlantic. If that should ever stop (And there is a possibility that it may), then there'll be some serious climate change going on in the British Isles.

This is hilariously untrue.

Yellowstone can't blow soon enough.

That's about as true as santa claus.

Fuck, I love how mad conservaniggers get when you shut them down with facts.

Next you'll say "m-m-muh perfect version has n-never b-been tried!".

The moon landing was fake because there is no such thing as a moon.

Shit not this retard again

And where conservative like you that whent in Iraq to keep them down where before they wherent a problem
Where idiot like you that destabilized the Arab Spring to keep them down and have Isis grow up

If bush father hadn't stick is cock in Arab oil, bush son wouldn't had the "excuse" to fight in Afghanistan and obongo wouldn't have the problem of sandniggers overflowing

Thats what I does
I seriously want to see what statistic you have that show any vaccinated kid getting chicken pox or tuberculosis
That's related for the hygiene quality increasing you dumbass
And car accident has been on the rise due to M&Ms quantity being eaten. I want to see your source on that

Could someone translate this post, please?

The temperature of the Earth has gone down over the past hundred years.

This is part of why the alarmists stopped calling it global warming. Because the Earth stopped warming and has been cooling.

The alarmists even do the exact thing they accuse deniers of doing. That being looking at the weather and crying "I'M TOTALLY RIGHT BECAUSE LOOK AT THE WEATHER!" rather than put forth evidence to support their case. Which is also why the alarmists depend on things like consensus amongst the 'scientific' community as proof they're right. What is not often talked about though is how that 'scientific' community is comprised of sociologists and women's studies majors rather than solely of people that study the climate. They use the fact that academia is filled with liberals that all agree with each other as proof that they are right which is part of what makes them look like such a joke to those critical of them.

Some vaccines seeming unnecessarily unsafe is a legitimate issue when it comes to mercury as a preservative in some of them.

Because it is purely a preservative. Germany famously produce a large batch of mercury free vaccines for much of its government officials when it needed it just a few years ago, whereas those mercury free vaccines would not necessarily be accessible to the general public.

Given how dangerous mercury can be for babies, it seems odd to give them vaccines that contain any mercury given it has any risk of damaging the child and the mercury is not required for the vaccine's production.

he should have stuck to his profession. instead he let his narcissism show and this is the result.

They don't use mercury any more, purely to reassure the public.

People who get riled up about use of mercury are getting riled up about a complete non-issue

Really? Well shit, NASA confirmed for lying, alarmist women's studies majors.

climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

Nope, these assholes may be able to get people in to space, but there's no fucking way we can trust them with a thermometer. Good thing we have you and your mountains of empirical evidence showing readings from across the last century that demonstrate the world is in face cooling down.

You do have that, right?

...

...

No, that was just hyped up by the media.

Two Best Fags and Dodger love JoJo, their followers too. Everyone with a jojo profile pic is a meme spouting kid. Its normie tier.

This is true. JoJo has become the new Naruto.

Zero sum game, like anybody who questions the almighty medical industry.

When someone goes out and does chemo, destroys their bodies and makes them puke and shit blood all day; takes all the drugs that make them feel horrible, then suffer for a year and still die from cancer, people shrug and say, "It's sad. Guess it was his time." But if you try alternative therapies and you die, people say, "See, that's what you get for trying that hippie dippy crap! He should've gone to see a doctor."

Not saying chemo doesn't work or anything, just saying people unquestioningly follow whatever the establishment says and anything outside of that clearly flawed box is written off.

Occam's razor would suggest all the pollution we're dumping into the atmosphere is actually having an effect and scientists are correctly pointing it out. Saying there's a global conspiracy is ludicrous, oil companies are the ones with the funding to mislead the public about this issue.

Chemo is worse than the cancer. It would be more humane to put a bullet in their brain than to put them through that. The success of chemo is actually very low.

...

Having the motivation to fudge the evidence doesn't mean they're actually doing it, just that they'd have a reason to do so. What they are doing is coming up with self-aggrandizing "solutions" that will do little to alleviate the problems, which isn't the same thing as manufacturing the scientific evidence. They're just opportunistic power-seekers taking advantage of a real problem.

Jojo will never be as bad as naruto

*normalfags

look at you, making excuses for them. sickening.

Yup, pointing out the flaws in your inane thought process means I'm just making excuses for people misusing scientific findings for their own gain. Great logic, retard.

This

Is not me.

This

Is me.

Though you were rightfully called the fuck out on your illogical bullshit.

So they promote the idea, for literally decades, push for it and push for it some more. Have it pushed in the media for decades long before they ever started claiming that it was "settled." They want to tax you to fix the problem, and levy those taxes on the WEST in particular, but they aren't doing it? Not just the motivation their handiwork is all there obvious to fucking see.

They have already been caught creating fraudulent evidence, and don't you give me any bullshit about that. They were caught, and they sure as shit are all involved together on this. The majority of global warming pushers (not those who just sign on) are in on the scam.

They've done far more than they have been caught doing, and frankly the shit produced by NASA is entirely unverifiable by anyone independent of a government body. Think about that hard for a moment. Nobody who doesn't have billions of dollars to spend can verify what they claim about global warming.

You're trying real hard to project this being a "real problem." The only reason you think it is a problem is because you have been told it is. Not because you know fucking shit about it other than what you have been fucking told. It is either that or that you are a shill.