5 ms·

Please keep your conspiracy theory propaganda off of HN. You're a danger to the world we live in. Ty.

pdx 10y ago
Why don't you want HN readers to watch the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGZqWMEpyUM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGZqWMEpyUM This is a scientific lecture, given by a professor. I found it very interesting. Why does it threaten you so much?
- findK 10y ago
  This is 2017.. you are saying you are not convinced by global warming. How can anyone take you seriously? Go back to reddit
  - pdx 10y ago
    I've been on HN a bit longer than you have. On most subjects, HN is outstanding, but when it comes to AGW, it's a bit of an Al Gore echo chamber. Why don't you watch the lecture?
    - Oletros 10y ago
      Al Gore? I didn't knew he was an scientist. Perhaps people here reads what actual climate scientists say and doesn't talk about Gore
    - epistasis 10y ago
      This is a technical matter, not a political one. Your mention of Al Gore makes me think that for you, it's a political battle and not a technical or scientific matter. There are now two very good reasons not to watch the video: 1) the lecture is by a dishonest man and we are being asked to trust that his models and judgement are accurate, and 2) it's most likely that the video was posted for a political agenda and not scientific or technical edification. An "echo chamber" when it comes to science usually means that things have been mostly figured out correctly. An "echo chamber" for political discussions is where it could be considered a bad thing.
      - pdx 10y ago
        Echo chambers are bad for science as well as for politics. It means that nobody is thinking anymore, they are just regurgitating a memorized response. On the matter of AGW, we have the situation where the science is not separate from politics because there is a strong push by many people to use the power of the state to impose changes on people and companies in the name of AGW mitigation. The fact that there are huge amounts of money that could flow into the coffers of heavily debt burdened western governments should make you pause a little to consider how this money may bias the science.
        epistasis 10y ago
        That's complete BS. As a scientist, I see rigorous arguments change into echo chambers all the time, because people collect more data and ideas and theories solidify. It's not dangerous, it's progress.
  - c0nducktr 10y ago
    Hey now, reddit doesn't need any more people like this either...
  - sverige 10y ago
    Why are people still using the appeal to the present year as though it were an argument? It's 2017!
- polotics 10y ago
  Hello pdx. You wrote: "Why does it threaten you so much?" This is a classic aggressive move, no-one has claimed being threatened, they have instead pointed out useful information about this obvious fraud. As you have been on HN indeed a while, may I ask you that you justify this "Why does it threaten you so much?", or go away? Thank You
  - pdx 10y ago
    You don't need to say "I feel threatened". Who the hell says "I feel threatened"? The fact that there is so much anger and gnashing of teeth is evidence that a worldview that does not include AGW must be viciously and immediately attacked. I find that fascinating.
    - Oletros 10y ago
      Anger? No, just tired of the same old debunked denyalist bullshit claims
    - plus 10y ago
      By "I find that fascinating," do you mean "I interpret that as meaning people who believe in anthropogenic global climate change are closed minded and unwilling to entertain opposing viewpoints"? Because if so, that's not at all what's happening here. What's happening is that people are unwilling to devote an hour of their time to an untrustworthy actor peddling a viewpoint that is heavily pushed by those who have the most to lose from a global switch away from fossil fuels. There are so many reasons not to bother watching this video, and the best reason you can come up with is "it's interesting".
    - umanwizard 10y ago
      People feel threatened because people like you are the reason our planet may well be unable to support global civilization in the near future.
  - Gargoyle 10y ago
    "You're a danger to the world we live in." is not pointing out useful information.
golergka 10y ago
Wow, this is a quite serious accusation to be throwing around like that. Can you back it up?
tomca32 10y ago
I don't think this kind of response is useful. Haven't we learned that dismissing or insulting people isn't going to change their opinions but rather just push more people over to their side?
- epistasis 10y ago
  It's tough to come up with the most useful response to what happened here. With time, I've come to see deadcast's response as one of the more useful. It's accurate, and honest, but you have to read a ton of pdx's comments and familiarize yourself with the science in order to realize it's true. People just casually reading through might be turned off by it, but looking at any of the data will prove deadcast to be right. People can believe in crazy conspiracy theories in one part of their life and be perfectly normal in the rest of their life, so it's not a universal condemnation of the poster. But it's a huge waste of time for anybody to watch those YouTube videos unless they make a study of conspiracy theories or the art of deception or scientific cranks themselves. So in that regard, saving 90 minutes of a persons life is a kindness.
  - tomca32 10y ago
    You might be right about people who believe in crazy conspiracy theories. Usually, if anybody gets really fanatical about some cause, there's nothing you can do to change their mind. However, by being aggressive and dismissive, we are insulting people that are on the fence, as well as the opposition. They will feel stupid and will see the other side as being more reasonable and accommodating. That is why I say that this kind of comment is not useful. It's actively pushing people in the center towards the other side. EDIT: Accidentally posted without finishing typing the comment.

pdx 10y ago

Why don't you want HN readers to watch the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGZqWMEpyUM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGZqWMEpyUM This is a scientific lecture, given by a professor. I found it very interesting. Why does it threaten you so much?

findK 10y ago
This is 2017.. you are saying you are not convinced by global warming. How can anyone take you seriously? Go back to reddit
- pdx 10y ago
  I've been on HN a bit longer than you have. On most subjects, HN is outstanding, but when it comes to AGW, it's a bit of an Al Gore echo chamber. Why don't you watch the lecture?
  - Oletros 10y ago
    Al Gore? I didn't knew he was an scientist. Perhaps people here reads what actual climate scientists say and doesn't talk about Gore
  - epistasis 10y ago
    This is a technical matter, not a political one. Your mention of Al Gore makes me think that for you, it's a political battle and not a technical or scientific matter. There are now two very good reasons not to watch the video: 1) the lecture is by a dishonest man and we are being asked to trust that his models and judgement are accurate, and 2) it's most likely that the video was posted for a political agenda and not scientific or technical edification. An "echo chamber" when it comes to science usually means that things have been mostly figured out correctly. An "echo chamber" for political discussions is where it could be considered a bad thing.
    - pdx 10y ago
      Echo chambers are bad for science as well as for politics. It means that nobody is thinking anymore, they are just regurgitating a memorized response. On the matter of AGW, we have the situation where the science is not separate from politics because there is a strong push by many people to use the power of the state to impose changes on people and companies in the name of AGW mitigation. The fact that there are huge amounts of money that could flow into the coffers of heavily debt burdened western governments should make you pause a little to consider how this money may bias the science.
      - epistasis 10y ago
        That's complete BS. As a scientist, I see rigorous arguments change into echo chambers all the time, because people collect more data and ideas and theories solidify. It's not dangerous, it's progress.
- c0nducktr 10y ago
  Hey now, reddit doesn't need any more people like this either...
- sverige 10y ago
  Why are people still using the appeal to the present year as though it were an argument? It's 2017!
polotics 10y ago
Hello pdx. You wrote: "Why does it threaten you so much?" This is a classic aggressive move, no-one has claimed being threatened, they have instead pointed out useful information about this obvious fraud. As you have been on HN indeed a while, may I ask you that you justify this "Why does it threaten you so much?", or go away? Thank You
- pdx 10y ago
  You don't need to say "I feel threatened". Who the hell says "I feel threatened"? The fact that there is so much anger and gnashing of teeth is evidence that a worldview that does not include AGW must be viciously and immediately attacked. I find that fascinating.
  - Oletros 10y ago
    Anger? No, just tired of the same old debunked denyalist bullshit claims
  - plus 10y ago
    By "I find that fascinating," do you mean "I interpret that as meaning people who believe in anthropogenic global climate change are closed minded and unwilling to entertain opposing viewpoints"? Because if so, that's not at all what's happening here. What's happening is that people are unwilling to devote an hour of their time to an untrustworthy actor peddling a viewpoint that is heavily pushed by those who have the most to lose from a global switch away from fossil fuels. There are so many reasons not to bother watching this video, and the best reason you can come up with is "it's interesting".
  - umanwizard 10y ago
    People feel threatened because people like you are the reason our planet may well be unable to support global civilization in the near future.
- Gargoyle 10y ago
  "You're a danger to the world we live in." is not pointing out useful information.

golergka 10y ago

Wow, this is a quite serious accusation to be throwing around like that. Can you back it up?

tomca32 10y ago

I don't think this kind of response is useful. Haven't we learned that dismissing or insulting people isn't going to change their opinions but rather just push more people over to their side?

epistasis 10y ago
It's tough to come up with the most useful response to what happened here. With time, I've come to see deadcast's response as one of the more useful. It's accurate, and honest, but you have to read a ton of pdx's comments and familiarize yourself with the science in order to realize it's true. People just casually reading through might be turned off by it, but looking at any of the data will prove deadcast to be right. People can believe in crazy conspiracy theories in one part of their life and be perfectly normal in the rest of their life, so it's not a universal condemnation of the poster. But it's a huge waste of time for anybody to watch those YouTube videos unless they make a study of conspiracy theories or the art of deception or scientific cranks themselves. So in that regard, saving 90 minutes of a persons life is a kindness.
- tomca32 10y ago
  You might be right about people who believe in crazy conspiracy theories. Usually, if anybody gets really fanatical about some cause, there's nothing you can do to change their mind. However, by being aggressive and dismissive, we are insulting people that are on the fence, as well as the opposition. They will feel stupid and will see the other side as being more reasonable and accommodating. That is why I say that this kind of comment is not useful. It's actively pushing people in the center towards the other side. EDIT: Accidentally posted without finishing typing the comment.