Former Bureau of Meteorology staff say claims they deliberately manipulated data to make warming seem worse are being fed by a ‘fever swamp’ of climate denial
This is a very specific and nasty example of a trend I’ve witnessed becoming common on a whole bunch of issues: climate, health, economy, pedophilia, etc etc.
Useful idiots online are spreading “I’m just asking questions” garbage about “pizza gate” and the “covid hoax” and the “climate hoax” etc etc, and anyone who has to deal with this just gets beaten down and withdraws their participation.
I don’t even know who the hell could possibly benefit from damaging the BOM/CSIRO, without some multi-party and honestly contradictory conspiracy of china + russia + resource companies.
Useful idiots online are spreading “I’m just asking questions” garbage about “pizza gate” and the “covid hoax” and the “climate hoax” etc etc, and anyone who has to deal with this just gets beaten down and withdraws their participation.
And then there are all the people who pretend to be useful idiots and heavily imply stuff whilst being careful never to explicitly say it. When you call them out, they turn around and use the “well I never said that” defence and pretend they are engaging in good faith. If you keep nailing them, eventually they have some mask off moment where they slip up and reveal their true character. We’ve seen quite a few of those here recently with the Voice discussion.
Yeah that summarises it quite well. I guess the left leaning equivalent of this is when people are too quick to put you in a box and won’t actually give you the benefit of doubt to argue your position in good faith.* They are both big issues with online discourse and why I generally try to push people a bit so they have a chance to prove whether they are just ignorant or if there’s actually malicious intent behind what they’re saying.
*And I make that criticism of the left as someone who is very left leaning myself. It pains me to see people undermine their arguments (or completely fail to make them) by stooping to the levels of the alt-right.
Big oil, coal and gas via sympathetic media (read greedy). They have thrown money and pundits at it for so long, not sure they could stop even if they wanted to.
By this point though you’d think they’d pack it up, as blind Freddy can see the writing is on the wall. But I watched FOX roll out Steve Milloy to say the Canadian wildfire smoke was no threat to humans a couple of weeks back. Steve Milloy has been called out as a climate denier since the '90s yet they still use him.
There are many more of them, it’s fun playing spot the denier disguised as an expert in the media but ultimately it is sole destroying knowing how far they have infiltrated and destroyed legitimate science and the public’s perception.
I’m guessing it was a technique they perfected nagging their parents for lollies and they have just never learned any better ways of engaging with society.
This is a very specific and nasty example of a trend I’ve witnessed becoming common on a whole bunch of issues: climate, health, economy, pedophilia, etc etc.
Useful idiots online are spreading “I’m just asking questions” garbage about “pizza gate” and the “covid hoax” and the “climate hoax” etc etc, and anyone who has to deal with this just gets beaten down and withdraws their participation.
I don’t even know who the hell could possibly benefit from damaging the BOM/CSIRO, without some multi-party and honestly contradictory conspiracy of china + russia + resource companies.
And then there are all the people who pretend to be useful idiots and heavily imply stuff whilst being careful never to explicitly say it. When you call them out, they turn around and use the “well I never said that” defence and pretend they are engaging in good faith. If you keep nailing them, eventually they have some mask off moment where they slip up and reveal their true character. We’ve seen quite a few of those here recently with the Voice discussion.
Ah yes. The card says moops
Yeah that summarises it quite well. I guess the left leaning equivalent of this is when people are too quick to put you in a box and won’t actually give you the benefit of doubt to argue your position in good faith.* They are both big issues with online discourse and why I generally try to push people a bit so they have a chance to prove whether they are just ignorant or if there’s actually malicious intent behind what they’re saying.
*And I make that criticism of the left as someone who is very left leaning myself. It pains me to see people undermine their arguments (or completely fail to make them) by stooping to the levels of the alt-right.
Big oil, coal and gas via sympathetic media (read greedy). They have thrown money and pundits at it for so long, not sure they could stop even if they wanted to.
By this point though you’d think they’d pack it up, as blind Freddy can see the writing is on the wall. But I watched FOX roll out Steve Milloy to say the Canadian wildfire smoke was no threat to humans a couple of weeks back. Steve Milloy has been called out as a climate denier since the '90s yet they still use him.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Milloy
There are many more of them, it’s fun playing spot the denier disguised as an expert in the media but ultimately it is sole destroying knowing how far they have infiltrated and destroyed legitimate science and the public’s perception.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/05/double-agent-fossil-fuel-lobbyists
https://www.desmog.com/2023/07/27/fossil-fuel-oil-gas-giants-shell-bp-using-british-influencers-to-go-viral/
https://www.desmog.com/2023/07/26/doj-investigation-big-oil-climate-deception-congressional-democrats/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/07/climate-solutions-big-oil-ipcc-report
I’m guessing it was a technique they perfected nagging their parents for lollies and they have just never learned any better ways of engaging with society.