🧵 Unscientific American
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 16:14:54 UTC No. 16172487
https://www.city-journal.org/articl
>Unscientific American
>Science journalism surrenders to progressive ideology.
have you read this text? thoughts?
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 16:31:31 UTC No. 16172497
>>16172487
they're in it for the money.
they'll stop when there's no money in it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IaEgc
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 16:59:07 UTC No. 16172524
>>16172497
>al gore
he got honoris causa phd from the most gay university of poland xD
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 17:48:19 UTC No. 16172571
>>16172497
>money
But all the money is in business. In fact, if you suck corporate dick you can make millions as a scientist. History is replete with scientists who sold their souls to corporations from Thomas Midgley Jr who lied about the dangers of leaded gasoline to all the researchers who lied about cigarettes for decades.
You dumbfucks have to twist yourselves into absolute knots in order to not only ignore the mountains of evidence about climate science but to conjure up the most ludicrous conspiracies imaginable just to suck oil company dick. Oil companies who know the science is against them so badly, they now openly admit it
https://www.basf.com/us/en/who-we-a
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 17:56:50 UTC No. 16172582
>>16172571
>As Shermer observed, many science journalists see their role not as neutral reporters but as advocates for noble causes. This is especially true in reporting about the climate. Many publications now have reporters on a permanent “climate beat,” and several nonprofit organizations offer grants to help fund climate coverage. Climate science is an important field, worthy of thoughtful, balanced coverage. Unfortunately, too many climate reporters seem especially prone to common fallacies, including base-rate neglect, and to hyping tenuous data.
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 23:28:45 UTC No. 16173008
bump
Anonymous at Sun, 12 May 2024 23:41:24 UTC No. 16173020
Scientific American became complete garbage around 5 years ago. Unreadable.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 08:38:19 UTC No. 16173548
bump
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 09:48:41 UTC No. 16173595
>>16173020
It's been garbage for at least 20 years. I'm not sure what changed 5 years ago, but I can only imagine DEI authors and gender nonsense.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 10:15:48 UTC No. 16173606
>>16172487
>have you read this text? thoughts?
I read about halfway through. I would have to read the columns that Michael Shermer submitted to properly comment on it.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 10:17:20 UTC No. 16173607
>>16172571
well, we're done here.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 17:51:19 UTC No. 16174203
>>16173020
its been trash for decades
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 05:49:17 UTC No. 16175060
>>16173595
Its owned by German WEF members
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 15 May 2024 09:05:26 UTC No. 16176843
>>16172524
He is a massive fatso these days. He probably ate that PhD
Anonymous at Wed, 15 May 2024 09:18:24 UTC No. 16176857
National Geographics got destroyed the same way. Did Popular Mechanics?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 May 2024 23:52:34 UTC No. 16177679
>>16176857
all those media outlets are owned by the same people
Anonymous at Thu, 16 May 2024 20:08:42 UTC No. 16178816
Anonymous at Fri, 17 May 2024 06:06:45 UTC No. 16179424
>>16172487
its manipulative popsci trash, always has been. those kind of publications strongly appeal to the type of people who prone to dunning krugerism, they read a two page article and presume they're then as expert as people who've been in their field for decades
Anonymous at Fri, 17 May 2024 22:49:35 UTC No. 16180645
>>16172487
its just another political propaganda rag thinly disguised as a science publication, everything in there is a lie
Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 06:08:55 UTC No. 16181103
>>16180645
Same goes for Nature
Anonymous at Sat, 18 May 2024 23:26:25 UTC No. 16182127
>>16181103
its true for just about every major publication, its necessary effect of having a monopolized media, they all shill the same lies
Anonymous at Sun, 19 May 2024 13:53:44 UTC No. 16182771
>>16180645
scientific american has never been a scientific journal, it has always been pop-sci
prove me wrong
Anonymous at Sun, 19 May 2024 15:03:15 UTC No. 16182849
>>16173020
>>16176281
>>16181103
>>16182771
>scientific american
>nature
>popular science
>popular mechanics
>national geographic
All of these were once based publications, maybe better for teenagers than for grownups but still perfectly respectable. They usually stayed away from politics. Sometime between 1994 and 2024 one by one they nosedived into the absolute faggot field and are thoroughly pozzed and monkeypoxxed
Anonymous at Sun, 19 May 2024 15:52:05 UTC No. 16182904
>>16182849
check this out XD
Anonymous at Sun, 19 May 2024 22:29:57 UTC No. 16183415
big freeze 1973 cover was about oil crisis
big freeze 1977 cover was about icy winter
they are not about climate. This is a chud pic
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 20 May 2024 19:50:57 UTC No. 16184972
>>16178816
who indeed
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 21 May 2024 05:36:07 UTC No. 16185664
>>16172487
Sciam is one of those publications that triggers to Gel-Mann amnesia effect in low IQ individuals who've had a specialty education in a scientific field and triggers being thrown into the garbage by everyone else who has had a specialty education in a scientific field. If you read any of their articles about whatever it is you majored in, you will immediately presume the publication is trash unless you're stupid
Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 00:16:59 UTC No. 16187036
>>16185664
tsmt
once i read an article in there about my field i never read that publication again. you can learn more reading used toilet paper
Anonymous at Wed, 22 May 2024 16:32:45 UTC No. 16188111
>>16172487
the usual incoming deboonk will be that nobody in the 70s actually believed in global cooling, it was like a fringe 2% of fake scientists
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 03:38:33 UTC No. 16188927
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 07:43:33 UTC No. 16189130
>>16188927
topkek
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 08:04:17 UTC No. 16189159
>>16182849
Most of them not only have had complete turnovers in their staffs, but are now owned by completely different entities. The only thing they have in common with their pre-2000 editions is the name on the masthead. They use that name's credibility inertia to squeeze out a few decades of relevance for their propaganda message.
Most of these magazines have fallen into deep declines in readership but the credibility of the name built up in the last century is worth the cost of production to get their message out into the world. They don't need people to read their articles if they can get others to repeat the message and use the name's credibility as the source. Wikipedia considers all of them as valid sources while Bob's substack page might have ten times the quality, it's not considered a valid source even if Bob is a top researcher in his field.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 10:43:57 UTC No. 16189292
>>16189159
who is Bob?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 May 2024 22:27:45 UTC No. 16190253
>>16189159
>Most of these magazines have fallen into deep declines in readership
yet somehow or other they still stay afloat and continue to sell advertising. does this disprove the theory that we live in a capitalist society?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 02:47:59 UTC No. 16190577
>>16190253
Jeff Bezos didn't buy the Washington Post for the advertising revenue, it just helps defray some of the cost. Same for many of these "science" magazines. They exist to push messages and give them the veneer of legitimate science. Subscription fees and advertising money is a nice way to lower some of the costs involved but aren't actually necessary.
>>16189292
He's a big boy.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 May 2024 22:34:56 UTC No. 16191745
>>16190577
Bezos bought the post because he can use it as a means to lobby congress to give money to his other businesses, since everyone in DC, including members of congress. reads the post every day.
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 07:51:40 UTC No. 16192292
>>16191745
He made $20 billion in defense department contracts for Amazon within a year of paying $250 million for the post
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 12:26:38 UTC No. 16192506
>>16191745
>everyone in DC, including members of congress. reads the post every day.
how do you know?
Anonymous at Sat, 25 May 2024 23:17:56 UTC No. 16193308
>>16192506
Thats where I live and work
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 09:42:12 UTC No. 16193824
>>16172487
those ones on the left are correct, the current interglacial period peaked thousands of years ago and we've been cooling off ever since
Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 15:41:56 UTC No. 16194279
>>16193308
are you a cia-glow-in-the-dark-nigger?
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 10:00:18 UTC No. 16195549
>>16194279
No, but I know a lot of those people. They're mostly jewish, the CIA is strange for a government agency in that very few blacks work there if any. I can't remember ever encountering anyone black connected to the CIA. Terry's epithet is inaccurate in that way
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 18:05:12 UTC No. 16196197
>>16195549
doesnt CIA have DEI department?
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 20:47:41 UTC No. 16196453
>>16193824
Ice age incoming
Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 20:55:51 UTC No. 16196468
>>16196453
Unironically until humans started warming the planet with our waste heat. A warmer, wetter world is better for humanity anyway. New deaths from extreme heat will be dwarfed by cold weather death reduction. Climate change is a net positive, as is higher CO2.
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 06:55:01 UTC No. 16197244
>>16196197
No, they're exempt from all domestic laws.
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 07:06:22 UTC No. 16197264
>>16172497
Something like HALF of Tesla's life time earnings are from selling scam carbon credits, just like Al Gore does. Let that sink in, half of Tesla profits are worthless greenwashing certificates that mean nothing. The other half is free gibs from the US government.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/20/al-go
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 07:20:10 UTC No. 16197287
>>16196468
>cold weather death reduction
Almost nobody was dying of the cold. Unless you mean starvation? But almost nobody was dying of tha either.
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 07:22:39 UTC No. 16197293
>>16197264
>put up $$$$ for Green Energy companies
>Green Energy company accepts the $$$$
This is surprising because..? The only shocking thing here is that Tesla actually makes the items they were promising. Most of these companies just pocket (“spend”) the money and then go out of business
Anonymous at Tue, 28 May 2024 12:38:56 UTC No. 16197616
>>16197287
Deaths due to cold weather and dying from cold are not the same thing.
A fatal car crash due to ice on the road is a death caused by cold weather, but is not a death cause by coldness.
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 01:51:01 UTC No. 16198515
>>16197616
>but is not a death cause by coldness.
yes it is, coldness caused the road to freeze
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 14:29:40 UTC No. 16199138
>>16197244
no way
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 14:59:57 UTC No. 16199165
>>16172487
Did anybody read the article?
>jewish writer wants to downplay the harmfulness of jewish sexual abuse
>gets told no
>HOW DARE YOU GOYIM, LE WOKISM HAS GONE TOO FAR
many such cases
Anonymous at Wed, 29 May 2024 21:58:54 UTC No. 16199769
>>16199138
When have you ever heard about one of them being arrested or convicted of anything?
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 06:25:08 UTC No. 16200367
>>16199165
Has the ADL moved in to shut them down yet?
Anonymous at Thu, 30 May 2024 21:43:10 UTC No. 16201477
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 05:57:23 UTC No. 16202105
>>16199769
They get arrested when they're caught acting as double agents for other countries
Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 19:38:34 UTC No. 16202893
>>16202105
except when the other country is israel
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:01:49 UTC No. 16203788
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 09:15:05 UTC No. 16203859
>>16173595
It started around 2000 or so, a much younger me had a subscription back in the days when you got these things called "magazines" in your mailbox every month, so I got to see it in real time.
They quickly went what we today would call "woke" on climate shit. I saw an interview of the editor (or whoever the guy in charge was) on Charlie Rose (remember him?) on PBS a few years later where he admitted it.
I would not be surprised if it has been getting continually shittier since then.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 09:16:11 UTC No. 16203861
>>16183415
i figured that this was the case.
i was going to look this up but glad you got there first.
here's your +1.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:29:25 UTC No. 16204625
>>16202893
ehh
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:48:26 UTC No. 16204728
>>16203788
>brits
opinion ignored and is probably a shit tabloid like the sun. Give me a verifiable resource.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 17:42:34 UTC No. 16204879
>>16202105
when was the last case it happened?
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:02:04 UTC No. 16205522
>>16204879
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/form
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 14:18:16 UTC No. 16206180
>>16205522
thx
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 14:19:49 UTC No. 16206182
BE SCARED AND SHIT... NOOOO WAIT PUT DOWN THAT WEAPON-ACK
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 02:13:59 UTC No. 16207111
>>16203861
sup reddit
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:49:50 UTC No. 16208075
>>16192506
You need to read the Washington Post every day to function in D.C. soiciety.
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:52:38 UTC No. 16208447
>>16208075
how so?
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 04:43:06 UTC No. 16209181
>>16208447
Thats just how it is there, the Washington Post is their baseline for truth
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:34:22 UTC No. 16210373
>>16209181
sounds like some sort of extremely stupid religious cult
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 04:46:27 UTC No. 16211071
>>16172487
Thats a good article, the scientism cultist schizos will never read it because picrel
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 13:51:48 UTC No. 16211529
>>16211071
scientism is good
being sjw is bad
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 07:48:08 UTC No. 16213255
>>16211529
>scientism is good
no, its bad. being a scientismist is part of being a sjw
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 01:09:20 UTC No. 16218552
>>16201477
lol
good pic
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:31:22 UTC No. 16220386
>>16218552
Its not funny, its disgusting. Anime erpers are repulsively nasty.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 06:47:37 UTC No. 16221442
>>16172487
>have you read this text?
not yet
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 21:07:58 UTC No. 16222825
>>16190577
He keeps announcing "The Washington Post lost $100million last year" but somehow or other the publication never goes out of business even though it never turns a profit. Clearly he is lying, it turns a massive profit for him because he uses it as a lobbying tool, the profits just aren't credited to The Washington Post, they're credited to one of his other businesses.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 21:30:16 UTC No. 16222882
>>16222825
He isn't the first to do it and he isn't even the last, you can look at X or that one site Dorsey made. Don't even remember what it is called. This is standard MO.
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 07:32:24 UTC No. 16223968
>>16213255
elaborate pls
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 22:23:00 UTC No. 16225574
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:38:41 UTC No. 16227098
>>16172487
>Science journalism surrenders to progressive ideology.
that happened over 50 years ago
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:20:42 UTC No. 16227934
>>16196468
>A warmer, wetter world is better for humanity anyway
Too bad CO2 doesn't cause global warming
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:35:40 UTC No. 16229166
>>16227934
wait what
Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 16:48:26 UTC No. 16230589
>>16229166
CO2 plainly doesn't cause global warming, if it did then the weather would have changed by now
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 04:01:07 UTC No. 16231724
>>16230589
this
there is no evidence that co2 cause "muh greenhouse effect" and theres lots of evidence that it doesn't
Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 17:42:20 UTC No. 16232958
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 05:23:51 UTC No. 16234010
>>16232958
Water vapor accounts for far, far more than 95% if the greenhouse effect on Earth. 100% is a much more accurate figure than 95% is.
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 10:11:00 UTC No. 16234272
>>16234010
THE GOYIM KNOW SHUT IT DOWN
Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 23:04:22 UTC No. 16235345
>>16190577
He just gets a different kind of advertising revenue.
$50 billion dollar military contracts for Amazon, more gigabit contracts and subsidies for Blue Origin.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 18:32:46 UTC No. 16236621
>>16172497
Retarded. Money is just a means to an end for them. They create it out of nothing.
Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 19:44:57 UTC No. 16236730
This thread was moved to >>>/pol/471243069