4 ms·
As someone who disagrees with Moore 99% of the time, this is absurd, and tells you more about the state of institutional "experts" and "science" than it does ab
by centimeter 7y ago
As someone who disagrees with Moore 99% of the time, this is absurd, and tells you more about the state of institutional "experts" and "science" than it does about the contents of Moore's movie.
Moore can publish (obvious!) bullshit for years and never really get called on it by "experts" or popular media. Now, he publishes something that goes against the dogma of a highly cathedralized and politicized field with such low predictive power that it hardly qualifies as a science at all, and there's a huge (and very successful) censorship effort.
I wonder, is the divergence between the predictive power of the field and the strength of its dogma enforcement an anomaly, or is it to be expected that fields with low predictive power will more aggressively defend their orthodoxy?
- leephillips 7y ago'Moore can publish (obvious!) bullshit for years and never really get called on it by "experts" or popular media' He gets called on it constantly. His reputation is so bad that it would never occur to me to bother watching this film. 'goes against the dogma' Or, contains objective falsehoods and libels.
- centimeter 7y agoWhen's the last time the publisher canceled a release of one of his films? > Or, contains objective falsehoods and libels. All of his movies have this, and they still don't provoke this kind of reaction.
- blablabla123 7y agoMichael Moore represents the very unusual combination of being left-leaning and populist. He points out flaws in western governments/corporates that get ignored most of the time and puts them into a narrative. (I don't agree with everything but Bowling for Columbine is very good, I think) It gets problematic how he exaggerates things, doesn't seem to be ashamed of distorting ("enhancing") arguments by stringing together unrelated - though concerning - topics. FWIW I think one needs to differentiate between Climate Science and the narrative of the Climate Movement. The former is more than 100 years old, the latter kind of under-developed and easy to attack. It's surprising though that Moore does it...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]