Let's be frank. A few years in the future, the behavior this article is referring to as stoking vaccine skepticism for money, will be rightly seen as fighting the vaccine / medical tyranny hysteria.
So, if 450 ppm is bad, wouldn't 900 ppm be worse? It wasn't so long ago in the climate's history that it was that way. Not so long before that, it was 1800. Wouldn't that make the world ultra-XXXL screwed beyond belief? What happened there?
These doomsday prophecies are always conveniently distant. You can tell people any scary nonsense as long as it's far enough away that everyone will have forgotten the details of your prediction by the time it fails to come to pass.
It's just the same as how we can show people today any number of doomsday prophecies from the past about how the world was definitely going to be wrecked by 2020, or 2010, or 2000, or 1990, but somehow nobody thinks they were serious back then... but then they take the doomsday prophecy about 2030 seriously.
The issue OP is making is that climate scientists have forecasted "tipping points"[0] for years on end now, and none of them have come true. It ruins the credibility of these "point of no return" articles.
Not sure what sort of "coming true" you guys are expecting. We're looking at a pretty unusual level of drought, fires, and flooding disasters all over the world, new temperature records almost every year, and faster temperature increases and ice loss than the IPCC had projected.
Back in 2007 the book Six Degrees was published, with one chapter per degree of warming, summing up the science of what results we would see. We're at one degree and everything in that chapter is happening now.
I think this is why young people think boomers are dumb when in reality boomers have just been burned over and over with doom predictions and by political lies obviously said to earn votes. These doom predictions are always conveniently 10 years away, long enough that it feels close and urgent but so it also feels that we still have time to fix. My high schooler came home one day just last year and said they learned that we are going to run out of fossil fuels in 10 years so we have to convert everything to renewable right away. I told him 25 years ago I ‘learned’ in high school that we would run out of fossil fuels in 10 years also. They even explained the models in my day not just showed the results to you. They had the total available stores, usage rate over time, predicted finding of new resources, and it was all neatly organized into charts perfectly that made it look impossible to be wrong to a high schooler whose only knowledge on the topic came from school.
And these prophecies are always of the 'worse than previously thought' kind. It really just makes me question how sophisticated climate modelling actually is/was.
> There's room in the FOSS space for both GrapheneOS and CalyxOS.
I doubt strcat disagrees with that. He's responding to specific statements comparing GrapheneOS and CalyxOS. I don't think we would have seen those comments if nobody had mentioned GrapheneOS.
When you see it's from WaPo, there's always an excellent chance that it's propaganda that serves the establishment, and this seems to be yet another example of that. There's no ongoing effort to disenfranchise eligible voters; there's an ongoing effort to count legal votes and not count illegal votes.
Felons can't vote; those under 18 can't vote; those who already voted somewhere else can't vote; you can't vote if you put your address down as a post office box or an empty parking lot; you can't falsely claim to be indefinitely confined and vote by mail; if you do vote by mail, there are procedures that have to be followed, things like verification that the ballot was actually sent out, verification of the signature, etc.
But all of those rules and many more were broken during the last presidential election, which made a lot of people wonder if we actually put the correct man in office, which in turn is why we're seeing this dishonest article today.
No big explanation is needed there -- many posters including myself get shadowbanned within hours of account creation, for nothing more than having the wrong opinion.
This is the truth. People here are overwhelmingly advocating what I think is probably the most dangerous argument I've ever seen seriously advanced, that some medical procedures are not eligible to be decided by the individual, because they're matters of public health.
If we go down that road, what government injection proffered in the name of public health could ever be refused? It's not as if you won't still be labelled a selfish anti-science anti-vaxxer if you refuse, say, the tenth injection rather than the first one.
I don't think there's really a fact-checking industry -- the industry that exists is something like a leftist Ministry of Truth. That stuff is unpopular because everyone is realizing that they're just more liars, hired by other liars.
The sad thing is it was a perfectly fine site before they ruined it. Having somewhere to point people to show them that no, Bill Gates wasn't giving away a million dollars or whatever was a handy service to have. Simple, non-controversial. The only ones that had a problem with it were the extremely gullible. Then they made the mistake of dragging politics into it, and it ruined the site, like it ruins everything.
I agree with you. I remember Snopes being really useful. I don't think I ever foresaw it being corrupted... your idea that politics corrupted it seems plausible. On the other hand, more generally, it seems like whenever any entity becomes so useful that many eyes are on it, it becomes like a magnet for corruption. In other words, it becomes a tasty target. Maybe Snopes is a victim of its own success.
