• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

Verax said:
Vagueness as a self defense mechanism. :roll:

Didn't triple goofs already debunk your NOAA diatribe? In all seriousness... does it really matter that they made a mistake? A mistake that they corrected... Is this the pivotal piece of evidence that makes or breaks AGW?
Click to expand...


Lol....no, no he did not.

How could he ?

Their " mistake " was that they assumed everyone was as easilly influenced as the average Liberal.

Had they used SCIENCE to come to their conclusion they would have never made the " mistake " of naming July 2012 as the hottest month in recorded history.
 
Fenton said:
Lol....no, no he did not.

How could he ?

Their " mistake " was that they assumed everyone was as easilly influenced as the average Liberal.

Had they used SCIENCE to come to their conclusion they would have never made the " mistake " of naming July 2012 as the hottest month in recorded history.
Click to expand...

Says NOAA doesnt use science to come to conclusions.

Presents NOAAs conclusions as science.
 
Threegoofs said:
Says NOAA doesnt use science to come to conclusions.

Presents NOAAs conclusions as science.
Click to expand...


Are you incappable of making a rationale rebuttal ?

One that deals with the issue at hand ?

Or are you limited to non sequiturs and generic rehtoric ?

The only reason the NOAA changed their bogus assertion was because they got caught fudging their data.

Someone who truly understands the need for absolute temperature measurments challenged their assertion and they backed down.

Science !
 
Fenton said:
Lol....no, no he did not.

How could he ?

Their " mistake " was that they assumed everyone was as easilly influenced as the average Liberal.

Had they used SCIENCE to come to their conclusion they would have never made the " mistake " of naming July 2012 as the hottest month in recorded history.
Click to expand...

So the NOAA is a crony institution whose liberal (sheep) manipulation reached critical mass and the manifestation of this corrupt propaganda was output in the form of manipulated July 2012 U.S. hottest month lies and blasphemy!?!? Oh my... good thing sharp stalwarts of science such as yourself caught them in this little snafu. Had the unintelligent monkeys not repeated the same lies in their updated data this little ClimateGate would have never seen the light of day.

Well done sir, you're taking back America one post at a time.
 
Fenton said:
Are you incappable of making a rationale rebuttal ?

One that deals with the issue at hand ?

Or are you limited to non sequiturs and generic rehtoric ?

The only reason the NOAA changed their bogus assertion was because they got caught fudging their data.

!
Click to expand...

(Citation needed)
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
Noted that the Politifact link is discounted due to their documented pro-liberal bias.
Click to expand...

Only to those making excuses for their lack of facts. We all know reality has a liberal bias. :lamo:lamo:lamo
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
None of those 3 that you mentioned are on the list that I posted. My conclusion is that these are 2 different lists, so applying your disclaimer reference to the WIKIPedia list does not apply.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were. Read what I wrote again. Then respond.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
I didn't say they were. Read what I wrote again. Then respond.
Click to expand...

I still stand by my post that there are probably 2 different lists. The one that I posted, and the one that had the dead guys on it.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
Only to those making excuses for their lack of facts. We all know reality has a liberal bias. :lamo:lamo:lamo
Click to expand...

Only in a liberal's la la land. :lamo:lamo
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
I still stand by my post that there are probably 2 different lists. The one that I posted, and the one that had the dead guys on it.
Click to expand...

Again, read what I said. You're arguing about something not stated.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
Only in a liberal's la la land. :lamo:lamo
Click to expand...

I believe in personal responsibility, so I don't blame facts for my errors. Try it; you'll feel better.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
Only to those making excuses for their lack of facts. We all know reality has a liberal bias. :lamo:lamo:lamo
Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:
I believe in personal responsibility, so I don't blame facts for my errors. Try it; you'll feel better.
Click to expand...

Which facts lead you to believe that reality has a liberal bias?
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
Which facts lead you to believe that reality has a liberal bias?
Click to expand...

That's a bit of a joke, hence the :lamo.

But if you can dispute the facts do so. Quit whining about the liberal media or liberal bias.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
That's a bit of a joke, hence the :lamo.

But if you can dispute the facts do so. Quit whining about the liberal media or liberal bias.
Click to expand...

I thought it had already been clearly and thoroughly documented and demonstrated in other threads that the main stream media (BLSM) does indeed have a liberal bias.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
I thought it had already been clearly and thoroughly documented and demonstrated in other threads that the main stream media (BLSM) does indeed have a liberal bias.
Click to expand...

No, it hasn't. Most, likely all, of them use flawed logic, relying on polls and the wrong questions. I know of no study that actually answers the question.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
I thought it had already been clearly and thoroughly documented and demonstrated in other threads that the main stream media (BLSM) does indeed have a liberal bias.
Click to expand...

Well, to use this thread as an example, it would certainly look to some conservatives that the media has a strong liberal bias. The media often presents AGW as simple fact - something that virtually all scientists agree upon. The conservatives here seem to disagree - with virtually no evidence to back them up.

So since reality is on the 'liberal' side of things according to conservatives, and they consider a feverish fantasy to be 'reality', I can see why many, many conservatives would be convinced that media has a liberal bias. But it says much more about conservatives and their grounding in reality than it does about the media.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
No, it hasn't. Most, likely all, of them use flawed logic, relying on polls and the wrong questions. I know of no study that actually answers the question.
Click to expand...

Referring to studies of the matter.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.
Click to expand...
Liberal Media Evidence | The Weekly Standard

To summarize the reporting on the studies:
1971, 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative
1976, 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative
1985, 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative

Doesn't seem to move much even over the 15 years cited.

I'd have to agree with the conclusion: "That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute."

Another study:
Admissions of Liberal Bias. A number of journalists have admitted that the majority of their brethren approach the news from a liberal angle. During the 2004 presidential campaign, for example, Newsweek’s Evan Thomas predicted that sympathetic media coverage would boost Kerry’s vote by “maybe 15 points,” which he later revised to five points. In 2005, ex-CBS News President Van Gordon Sauter confessed he stopped watching his old network: “The unremitting liberal orientation finally became too much for me.” See Section
Click to expand...
Media Bias Basics Specifically the page: Media Bias Basics - Admissions of Liberal Bias

And finally, the journalists in the news media themselves acknowledge that they have a liberal bias.

Top journalists from The New York Times, NBC News and CNN acknowledged Wednesday that, generally speaking, the national media have a liberal bias.
On a Playbook Breakfast panel, the Times' Peter Baker and Mark Leibovich, NBC's Kelly O'Donnell and CNN's Jake Tapper all said "yes" when asked if the news media lean left — though all agreed it was a nuanced issue having more to do with journalists' life experiences than with any particular agenda.

"Most of my colleagues, I have no idea what their politics are. ... But think about it: I live in northwest Washington, none of my neighbors are evangelical Christians, I don't know a lot of people in my kid's preschool who are pro-life," Leibovich said. "When you have conversations, at all the newspapers I've worked at, about politics — it doesn't happen often — but you see clues that there is absolutely a left-wing bias."
Click to expand...
Journalist consensus: Media lean left - POLITICO.com

You still refute that the news media a liberal bias? I guess you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

By the way, I don't disagree with you that much of the news media do use flawed logic.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
No, it hasn't. Most, likely all, of them use flawed logic, relying on polls and the wrong questions. I know of no study that actually answers the question.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course it's flawed logic, relying on polls and the wrong questions. That's the substance of liberal bias. You could have added that they censor much of the news from the American people and only show one side of a debate.

Do you believe that an inexperienced hustler like Barack Obama could ever have been elected without media bias???
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
Referring to studies of the matter.

Liberal Media Evidence | The Weekly Standard

To summarize the reporting on the studies:
1971, 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative
1976, 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative
1985, 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative

Doesn't seem to move much even over the 15 years cited.

I'd have to agree with the conclusion: "That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute."

Another study:
Media Bias Basics Specifically the page: Media Bias Basics - Admissions of Liberal Bias

And finally, the journalists in the news media themselves acknowledge that they have a liberal bias.

Journalist consensus: Media lean left - POLITICO.com

You still refute that the news media a liberal bias? I guess you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

By the way, I don't disagree with you that much of the news media do use flawed logic.
Click to expand...

All of those are flawed, thought complaining about bias and using the Weekly Standard is funny.

Being liberal doesn't mean you're biased in your reporting, so throw that out. No one can admit for others, so a few saying it is so doesn't make it so. So throw that silliness out. So, I repeat, I have not seen a valid study.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Grant said:
Yes, of course it's flawed logic, relying on polls and the wrong questions. That's the substance of liberal bias. You could have added that they censor much of the news from the American people and only show one side of a debate.

Do you believe that an inexperienced hustler like Barack Obama could ever have been elected without media bias???
Click to expand...

it is flawed logic and I have explained each one presented many times. It isn't like I didn't show why. And nothing accurate is censored. the trouble is your side not only wants your bias front ant and center, you often don't care if it's accurate or not. Just say dumb exaggerated ****, like Fox, and you won't call it biased. ;)
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
it is flawed logic and I have explained each one presented many times. It isn't like I didn't show why. And nothing accurate is censored. the trouble is your side not only wants your bias front ant and center, you often don't care if it's accurate or not. Just say dumb exaggerated ****, like Fox, and you won't call it biased. ;)
Click to expand...

So you sincerely believe that Barrack Obama had the experience and intelligence to be President of the United States?
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Boo Radley said:
All of those are flawed, thought complaining about bias and using the Weekly Standard is funny.

Being liberal doesn't mean you're biased in your reporting, so throw that out. No one can admit for others, so a few saying it is so doesn't make it so. So throw that silliness out. So, I repeat, I have not seen a valid study.
Click to expand...

No, 'being liberal doesn't mean you're biased in your reporting', however, it's pretty clear that the news broadcasts are providing biased, pro-liberal and pro-democrat news coverage. This is fact and not fantasy. Goes to actual counts of news stories column-inches and minutes / seconds given to various topics. All very exacting and scientific that.

I suppose you throw out the journalists themselves admitting that they have a liberal bias as well?

Gonna have to open your eyes to the real world out there, rather than refusing to admit 'that what you don't want' is really out there.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

Grant said:
So you sincerely believe that Barrack Obama had the experience and intelligence to be President of the United States?
Click to expand...

I believe he was the better choice. I've seen very poor choices the last several elections. But we're to blame for that, not wanting honesty in our elections. And good people had to degrade themselves, like McCain to appease radical factions. This made him worse. Romney will never be president because he doesn't have it in him to lead the majority. Obama is flawed, but even he has to be beaten by a better opponent. You can't just phone it in and throw anyone up there. the candidate has to have some substance.
 
Re: Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over (part 1 of 2)

eohrnberger said:
No, 'being liberal doesn't mean you're biased in your reporting', however, it's pretty clear that the news broadcasts are providing biased, pro-liberal and pro-democrat news coverage. This is fact and not fantasy. Goes to actual counts of news stories column-inches and minutes / seconds given to various topics. All very exacting and scientific that.

I suppose you throw out the journalists themselves admitting that they have a liberal bias as well?

Gonna have to open your eyes to the real world out there, rather than refusing to admit 'that what you don't want' is really out there.
Click to expand...

Pretty clear how? Because it doesn't fit what you want to see? We have to have some measurable way to determine bias. It should measured based on language (read any Weekly Standard article and you'll see what I mean) and inaccuracies without consequence (again, weekly standard folks are inaccurate all the time and keep their jobs). not by the illogical measures most of these so called studies use.

As I said, a journalist can only admit for him or herself, and not the majority. So, using only a few is hardly any evidence at all. Their is no reason to accept them as speaking for the whole. It's even illogical to do so.
 
cabse5 said:
No, I believe in mutation. Evolution implies matter evolved to a complex state from nothing... and this hasn't been proven.
Click to expand...

Huh? You have no idea how evolution even works. Open even a high school biology book and stop embarrassing yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom