Why were political commentators so arrogant and ignorant in the 2000s?

[TexasRules]

Nowhere in your rambling did you actually provide support for your initial claim.

My initial claim that he never heard of Al Gore? Point taken, I guess.

- - - Updated - - -

No i did not

You claimed Al Gore was an example of "according to some more radical branches of the left by 2006 everyone would be dead by global warming"

So since Al Gore is not a part of a radical branch of the left he is not an example of that

It was a rebuttal of your first post

Preceeded by a question of you even being able to prove your claim (which i suspect you cannot because i suspect he never said that)

I am just branching out a bit

Feel free to adress the question that is somewhat irrelevant to what the radical left is saying (which is probably too scary for innocent little right winger ears anyhow :P and will not be presented by a person on tour in a private jet.. the flying is more the ballistic trajectory of a cobblestone i guess )

But if you can back that up with a source then surprise me

Edit: but even if he did it would not help

You literally said that I could surprise you and post a source and then immediately typed but even if he did it would not help.

[Grapemask]

You have never heard of Al Gore?

And this thread is pure bait. I only came here for the lulz.

This Al Gore thing is a common tactic among climate deniers. Like to the point of almost being a copy pasta.

Al Gore never said the world would be over. His earliest statement warning of Doom was that the world would reach a point of no return from which it can no longer be saved within 10 years (2016), if and only if things continued along their path at that time. We can expand this to the claim that climate scientists X years ago claimed the world would be over by now: no one of any level of credibility made such a claim, but those of credibility did state - mathematically, even - that we would reach a no-return point and that we would have X consequences around Y time even before that point if we didn't take action.

Even taken at face value, you're arguing that the world continued exactly as it was since that time. For most of the intervening years, we stabilized CO2 instead of growing at our usual rate - for almost a decade, our CO2 grew about 300% slower than it did in the decades before it. The Paris Climate Accords didn't turn the world upside down, but they and other "go green" initiatives convinced people to maybe dial it down a notch. So we did not reach the point of no return, yet the math remains the same that we are headed there. The math remains unchanged. And we continue to see all of those effects they said would crop up along the way.

This is like arguing that in the 80s, someone prophesied incorrectly that we'd destroy our atmosphere with ODS! It never happened! We're still here! MYTH! Ignoring that the entire world banned most of them, to the point that we can detect when they're used from hundreds of miles away, so we averted the thing we said would happen.

[Xarkan]

My initial claim that he never heard of Al Gore? Point taken, I guess.

- - - Updated - - -




You literally said that I could surprise you and post a source and then immediately typed but even if he did it would not help.

Fine.. i will "edit" a sentence
Preceeded by a question of you even being able to prove your claim (which i suspect you cannot because i suspect he never said that)
Should have been
Preceeded by a question of you even being able to prove your claim that he had ever said that the earth would end in 2006 (which i suspect you cannot because i suspect he never said that)

Your claim is the following by context (your use of Gore as an example of a radical leftist that claimed the world would end in 2006)
A) Gore is a radical leftist
B) Gore did claim the world would end in 2006

Neither is true i believe and your lack of evidence for B hints that you have none

Both need to be true for your claim that Gore is an example of a radical leftist that claimed we would all be dead in 2006

[Endus]

I rarely start threads because they end up getting locked due to people here not handling the fact someone does not think like the lemmings that they are. Endus, a former mod here, will intentionally lead you to get banned so you got to be careful.

Don't blame me because you can't help but break site rules. That shit's not my fault. Take some damn personal responsibility for your own poor behaviour and impulse control.

[Lenonis]

Don't blame me because you can't help but break site rules. That shit's not my fault. Take some damn personal responsibility for your own poor behaviour and impulse control.

And, interestingly enough even though discussing moderation, flaming other posters, and accusing others of trolling are all against the forum rules he remains uninfracted. So even though he's flagrantly breaking the rules he's being given a pass which goes against his whole premise.

[unfilteredJW]

And, interestingly enough even though discussing moderation, flaming other posters, and accusing others of trolling are all against the forum rules he remains uninfracted. So even though he's flagrantly breaking the rules he's being given a pass which goes against his whole premise.

Victim hood is always an easy out for someone not wanting to take responsibility for their own actions.

[Xarkan]

And, interestingly enough even though discussing moderation, flaming other posters, and accusing others of trolling are all against the forum rules he remains uninfracted. So even though he's flagrantly breaking the rules he's being given a pass which goes against his whole premise.

Well if you think someone violates the rules report it and move on.

[Deletedaccount1]

Glenn Beck has such a nice voice.

[Mihalik]

I've got to the point where I am convinced that climate change deniers are mentally ill.

There simply no other reasonable explanation for the disconnect between reality and their beliefs.

Even in this thread, all we get from them is projection, paranoid conspiracy theories, and denial.

It's not about information or even about education at this junction, what they need is therapy.

- - - Updated - - -

Well if you think someone violates the rules report it and move on.

If mods applied their own rules with any degree of consistency Reich wingers in here would be endlessly moaning about censorship and white genocide or whatnot.

We have people who are self confessed neo Nazis, we have a dude whose avatar is a good damn Neo Nazi symbol etc.

Right leaning threads and posters etc get quite a bit of leeway in this post-truth era to create the appearance of impartiality.

It's not just MMO champ tho. It's all social media, newspapers, TV etc.

[Xarkan]

If mods applied their own rules with any degree of consistency Reich wingers in here would be endlessly moaning about censorship and white genocide or whatnot.

We have people who are self confessed neo Nazis, we have a dude whose avatar is a good damn Neo Nazi symbol etc.

Right leaning threads and posters etc get quite a bit of leeway in this post-truth era to create the appearance of impartiality.

It's not just MMO champ tho. It's all social media, newspapers, TV etc.

And if all that is true then the only price you can get from commenting on it in a thread is that they would give you a mark

Report it and complain to admins if they do nothing..

[Aenigma84]

Do you have an actual source for that?

might not be from then
but you got modern day politicians just as stuppid in that case
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...te_change.html

[Toppy]

It is definitely not on a single side. As I get older I remember seeing a shitload of crazy ignorant commentators in both sides.

And yes, the right (specially the religious right) on the 90s - 2000s had retarded views on video games (and many other topics), it is the main reason I was drawn to the left while growing up. That being said, what happened when the right lost most of its power and the world shifted left? Here comes the new left wing game critics saying that games make everyone a sexist, misogynist, bigot etc.

This is the main reason why there is the pendulum theory, when one side starts winning and gets momentum, it goes way too far, until people start leaving it and it swings in the other direction. Don't worry, I am sure in 10 to 20 years we will again see some crazy right wing moralist become popular bashing video games for whatever is inappropriate then.

Here is the thing that people seem to constantly forget, or just are unwilling to admit.

Both sides may do it yes.

But if the ratio of that bullshit is 10 to 1, then you can't keep saying both sides are doing it while still being all that honest. By not including "and one of those two sides does it substantially more" you're being completely misleading.

"BOTH SIDES" is just a bullshit tactic to mislead people and it works so well. Its why the GOP's go to way of handling things is to keep the people they have, and not sway the other side, oh no, for the other side you just keep saying they are just as bad so get the people you can't get, disinterested. You can't win people over because you're a dishonest sack of shit, so just make them think everyone is.

[The Butt Witch]

They still are?

[Xarkan]

might not be from then
but you got modern day politicians just as stuppid in that case
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...te_change.html

Here is what CNN commented on that claim

"With her 12-year timeline, it's possible that Ocasio-Cortez is referencing a major global report from last October by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nation's scientific authority on climate change.
The year 2030 came up prominently in that report, marking the first year that the planet is likely to warm by 1.5 degrees Celsius (the report provided a range of between 2030 and 2052). This temperature was set as an idealistic goal during the 2015 Paris Climate Accord. It is widely seen among climate scientists as a marker, beyond which long-term, irreversible change begins to occur, but does not signify the end of the world."

The world is not ending either way and humanity is probably not irreversible doomed by 2030. The claim is irresponsible for sure, it is the kind of argument that blinds people to the consequences of that 2030 prediction by being extreme and false. It helps ensure that people fail to take action that should be taken

However i am still wondering how you think you can count her as a radical lefty

She looks too much like she would worry about breaking a nail when picking up those cobblestones to throw at "fascist" cops. Peoples idea of radical lefties is .. very different from mine, your radical lefties are rather tame

[Knolan]

Here is the thing that people seem to constantly forget, or just are unwilling to admit.

Both sides may do it yes.

But if the ratio of that bullshit is 10 to 1, then you can't keep saying both sides are doing it while still being all that honest. By not including "and one of those two sides does it substantially more" you're being completely misleading.

"BOTH SIDES" is just a bullshit tactic to mislead people and it works so well. Its why the GOP's go to way of handling things is to keep the people they have, and not sway the other side, oh no, for the other side you just keep saying they are just as bad so get the people you can't get, disinterested. You can't win people over because you're a dishonest sack of shit, so just make them think everyone is.

IMO, the side with political momentum does it more (or at least has more visibility).

If you think one side does it more and period, it is very likely your political bias talking.

[Toppy]

IMO, the side with political momentum does it more (or at least has more visibility).

If you think one side does it more and period, it is very likely your political bias talking.

Considering one side has consistently done more bullshit for decades now I fail to see how you can make that argument other than willfully being ignorant of politics for the last few dozen years.

[Knolan]

Considering one side has consistently done more bullshit for decades now I fail to see how you can make that argument other than willfully being ignorant of politics for the last few dozen years.

Probably because you don't think that your side is doing it or you believe in the bullshit your side does and then thinks it is OK.

[Beefhammer]

Do you have an actual source for that?

His ass. No really.

- - - Updated - - -

Because they had less knowledge in previous decades. It takes a while to debunk all the wrong theories that accumulate such as the theory that videogames cause violence or that the climate will kill us in 12 years.

We knew in the 90s video games do not cause violence. It was debunked back then. This is just typical conservative fearmongering.

- - - Updated - - -

If their was any justice on this website what so ever you would be banned for calling people mentally ill. Hilarious how the left never applies their rules to them selves.

Oh please, much like flat earth believers and fake moon landing believers, climate change denial has no merit nor should be a respected argument. It takes someone who is a willful liar or someone mentally deficient to spread that misinformation.

[cubby]

If their was any justice on this website what so ever you would be banned for calling people mentally ill. Hilarious how the left never applies their rules to them selves.

Hilarious that you never see the blatant hypocrisy from your own Dear Leader but seek out feigned concern from other areas. Remind me again which side ignores the blatant law breaking from their own "leaders"?

[The Butt Witch]

Oh, you mean like this?

https://www.kusi.com/cnns-don-lemon-...rs-on-live-tv/