After Our Fine Member opened with:
And accused me of being:"here's what I sent my buddies here in denver yesterday. So far, noone has has the fortitude to write me back:"
"a supporter of the eco-lemming/global alarmist movement that supports policy and advertisement (propaganda) efforts of a very scary movement regarding anthropogenic global warming."I decided to pick up the phone and give Our Fine Member a call. As it turns out, Our Fine Member actually is Dilbert:
As for the bitter and unsuccessful scientists, they produced this number which tells us the earth actually is cooling.
When talking on the phone with Our Fine Member, he strongly encouraged me to research where my information was coming from because, as he points out, certain alarmist organizations may profit from the global warming frenzy and use their resources to promote further scare tactics. Well, that may or may not be, but upon researching our bitter and unsuccessful scientists, all I seem to come up with is a bunch of hubbub on how second-hand smoke is great.
2 comments:
I wonder if Our Fine Member is a Rush Limbaugh fan. Did you know that Rush started reporting on his view of the world two decades ago -- in 1988? It was the year after Ronald Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine in news reporting, which required those offering opinions to provide perspectives of both sides of this issue. So, if you want people to believe that global warming is a hoax, there was the opening.
Okay, enough seriousness.
Now let me get back to that lunker stuff. I can't believe Nelli caught the big fish -- again! Of course it was no more of a native than that carp Josh caught. Gotta get these kids straight.
--Salmon Czar
It seems like the fundamental problem involves distinguishing between fact and opinion. If we could do this, it wouldn't matter if people like Rush (or any liberal quack, for that matter) produced one-sided programing because everyone could see that it was baseless opinion. It seems like the problems arise when someone tries to pass off opinion as fact.
Back to the subject of global warming, another fact/opinion problem arises when journalists report on climate change and feel they need to show "both sides", even though one side lacks scientific credibility. In these instances, one side is based in fact and the other side is based in opinion mascarading as fact, and the journalists and public are not critical enough to tell the difference.
Post a Comment