Conservative news organizations are being castigated by many traditional media organizations for promoting "fake news" stories for political advantage ... one such example being the recent pizza parlor child-trafficking conspiracy theory ... see: New York Times Story ... which caused a mentally-ill man to fire an AR-15 rifle into the ceiling there in protest. However such fake news stories pale in comparison to some whoppers that the main stream media have propagated over the years. Here is a story on this twisted meme ... see: The Hill Story.
Besides these The Hill references to the Iran nuclear deal and Obamacare fake news stories, there are literally hundreds more memes that those mainstream news outlets, which we used to rely on, spoon fed us over the years ... all of which turned out to be phony. Here are just a sampling: Al Sharpton/Tawanda Brawley, vanishing polar bears, Benghazi attack based on an Internet video, the Religion of Peace, Rathergate, no WMDs in Iraq, "hands up don't shoot", Ted Kennedy's 1965 immigration amnesty "fix", carbon dioxide as a pollutant, etc., etc., etc.
Do I make my point?
12 comments:
I agree that spreading lies about the opposition is un-patriotic and unethical.
Are you saying that most credible scientists are wrong when they assert that Carbon Dioxide is a "greenhouse gas?"
Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas ... it is not a pollutant ... big difference.
And who, pray tell, is the bigger offender? (Rhetorical question)
If the NYT and Breitbart both publish bogus stories, who has the bigger megaphone?
Any "credible scientist" should be willing to admit that carbon dioxide is the basis of all life on Earth. Calling it a pollutant is heresy ...
Forget pollutant. Greenhouse gasses heat up the atmosphere, ergo global warming is in part due to the build-up of greenhouse gasses, like CO2. Seems like a sensible conclusion to me.
The biggest offenders are the ones who have spread Obama birther lies, 9/11 and Sandy Hook conspiracy truthers, etc. Unvetted lies mean't to stir-up racial and class tensions are beyond "free speech," and should be prosecuted as libel or slander.
"in part" possibly ... but is it 1% or 100% as the alarmists assert? It would be a lot easier to determine if these "climate scientists" didn't keep fudging their temperature data to prove their point. Professor Emeritus Freeman Dyson of Princeton says the world's plants are on a "starvation diet of CO2".
Escalation of racial and class tensions were the subtle speciality of Obummer ... and he was pretty good at it.
Yale Prof Michael Lemonick says in response, "These sorts of arguments are advanced routinely by climate-change skeptics, and dismissed just as routinely by *those who work in the field* as clueless at best and deliberately misleading at worst."
We have paved paradise and put up a parking lot. Come to your senses before it's too late!
Lemonick is not a Professor ... he is in the office of communication at Yale. Dyson is a Professor of Physics. I like my side better!
Post a Comment