What a silly premise. There has been no global warming this century. Peak environmental temps were in the '20s and '30s, Trend is down since then if anything. Polar bears were going extinct, now there are record numbers. Great Barrier Reef was going extinct, now it is setting records in size. Arctic was to be ice free by 2014, it has never varied significantly in modern time is just fine currently. California was in permanent drought, now is in a period of massive record precipitation. Predicted disaster after predicted disaster due to 'global warming' has proven to be totally false. And the elephant in the room, CO2 is NOT a greenhouse gas, it is currently at near historic lows since the Cambrian Explosion when most current forms of life were created when the concentration of CO2 was 16 times higher than currently, is still being promoted baffles me. Supposedly expert 'scientists' continue to promote the hoax in the face of all the contrary evidence and real science. Amazing.
Thanks for the information and analysis, Doc. I can't obtain anything like it from a newspaper or mainsteam magazine any more; all that they have on offer is ideological reinforcement. Even local "news" is saturated with it. The latest crop of young "journalists" are quite open about abandoning any aspiration toward objectivity. Their managing editors are quite proud of them.
Thank you. This is an aside, but: as AI-based "journalism", news via social media, deep fakes, etc become more and more prevalent in the years ahead, it will be fascinating to watch how organizations attempt to combat this and point people towards truthful reporting. It can be done, if tricky, but my biggest concern is that no one will want it; why bother if you can just find the news you agree with, any time you want?
"my biggest concern is that no one will want it; why bother if you can just find the news you agree with, any time you want?"
It's not merely a valid concern, it's a logical extrapolation from verifiable evidence accrued over a very long period of time.
The age of ephemeral record-keeping is upon us, and it acts as an accelerant, fanning the eternal embers of confirmation bias and adaptive learning into everlasting conflagration.
In approximately one more generation, the very concept of permanent records will be considered entirely obsolete. Already, we encounter situations where the only validity of a reference lies in its availability as ephemera.
When we were young, verifying a footnote meant obtaining a physical copy of the material and reviewing it. The material was persistent; the second edition of a physical document remained intact and unchanged from the moment it was printed.
it seems reasonable to ask what is to be done. The answer, I think, is that we do as we have always done; continue to strive toward objectivity and accept that our imperfection cannot become an excuse for lowering standards.
I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, Doctor, despite many productive conversations with members of that cohort. That said, it seems possible that market forces may become a mitigating factor. I'm referring to the cost of acting on biased reporting. The implications are obvious. Mind you, I'm not making the assertion that "the market" will solve the problem, only that it may make a nontrivial contribution.
As Canadian psychologist Peterson has publicly observed, "thinking is hard." Your concern is shared by many, and a grave concern it is. Bad enough that thinking is unduly affected by yellow journalism and the chattering classes; outsourcing thought to manipulative ephemera increases the malign effect exponentially.
What has fascinated me more than anything about this process, has been the evolution of homespun salesmanship into a sophisticated engine fueled by behavioral science. Adding data manipulation into that witch's brew compounds the felony that is the fracturing of minds (apologies for the tortured allusions.)
Indulge me for a moment and look at it from a mythical perspective. Someone must always and continually undertake the Herculean task of cleaning the Auegean stables. It a Sisyphean labor, and it looks like it's your turn. If not you, then who? If not now, then when? Thou art more, and paradoxically less, than a voice crying in the wilderness.
To finish the analogy of market forces, it is well to remember that they are also forces of nature.
I reckon you'e doing a pretty good job of being a force of nature.
Probably smart to trust neither the WP nor the CDC. Both have proved themselves unequal to their tasks.
Yeah... the new pandemic coming I definitely need hazmat suits for this one 😁😆 https://apple.news/Ady9KEk7EThiy7hEP3SCdpw
What a silly premise. There has been no global warming this century. Peak environmental temps were in the '20s and '30s, Trend is down since then if anything. Polar bears were going extinct, now there are record numbers. Great Barrier Reef was going extinct, now it is setting records in size. Arctic was to be ice free by 2014, it has never varied significantly in modern time is just fine currently. California was in permanent drought, now is in a period of massive record precipitation. Predicted disaster after predicted disaster due to 'global warming' has proven to be totally false. And the elephant in the room, CO2 is NOT a greenhouse gas, it is currently at near historic lows since the Cambrian Explosion when most current forms of life were created when the concentration of CO2 was 16 times higher than currently, is still being promoted baffles me. Supposedly expert 'scientists' continue to promote the hoax in the face of all the contrary evidence and real science. Amazing.
Thanks for the information and analysis, Doc. I can't obtain anything like it from a newspaper or mainsteam magazine any more; all that they have on offer is ideological reinforcement. Even local "news" is saturated with it. The latest crop of young "journalists" are quite open about abandoning any aspiration toward objectivity. Their managing editors are quite proud of them.
Thank you. This is an aside, but: as AI-based "journalism", news via social media, deep fakes, etc become more and more prevalent in the years ahead, it will be fascinating to watch how organizations attempt to combat this and point people towards truthful reporting. It can be done, if tricky, but my biggest concern is that no one will want it; why bother if you can just find the news you agree with, any time you want?
"my biggest concern is that no one will want it; why bother if you can just find the news you agree with, any time you want?"
It's not merely a valid concern, it's a logical extrapolation from verifiable evidence accrued over a very long period of time.
The age of ephemeral record-keeping is upon us, and it acts as an accelerant, fanning the eternal embers of confirmation bias and adaptive learning into everlasting conflagration.
In approximately one more generation, the very concept of permanent records will be considered entirely obsolete. Already, we encounter situations where the only validity of a reference lies in its availability as ephemera.
When we were young, verifying a footnote meant obtaining a physical copy of the material and reviewing it. The material was persistent; the second edition of a physical document remained intact and unchanged from the moment it was printed.
it seems reasonable to ask what is to be done. The answer, I think, is that we do as we have always done; continue to strive toward objectivity and accept that our imperfection cannot become an excuse for lowering standards.
I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, Doctor, despite many productive conversations with members of that cohort. That said, it seems possible that market forces may become a mitigating factor. I'm referring to the cost of acting on biased reporting. The implications are obvious. Mind you, I'm not making the assertion that "the market" will solve the problem, only that it may make a nontrivial contribution.
As Canadian psychologist Peterson has publicly observed, "thinking is hard." Your concern is shared by many, and a grave concern it is. Bad enough that thinking is unduly affected by yellow journalism and the chattering classes; outsourcing thought to manipulative ephemera increases the malign effect exponentially.
What has fascinated me more than anything about this process, has been the evolution of homespun salesmanship into a sophisticated engine fueled by behavioral science. Adding data manipulation into that witch's brew compounds the felony that is the fracturing of minds (apologies for the tortured allusions.)
Indulge me for a moment and look at it from a mythical perspective. Someone must always and continually undertake the Herculean task of cleaning the Auegean stables. It a Sisyphean labor, and it looks like it's your turn. If not you, then who? If not now, then when? Thou art more, and paradoxically less, than a voice crying in the wilderness.
To finish the analogy of market forces, it is well to remember that they are also forces of nature.
I reckon you'e doing a pretty good job of being a force of nature.
Loved your closing sentence Ted 😃