Because Science

To start with something important and what should be non-partisan, I would like to share this article, written by a roving journalist who spent the last two months going from town to town in order to get a first-hand understanding of the true nature of the protests and riots, as well as their impact. This should be required reading:

https://medium.com/@mtracey/two-months-since-the-riots-and-still-no-national-conversation-12a7e3e4e006

The journalist is not a Republican. But he went on to interview with Dan Crenshaw afterwards, and the conversation was a valuable one as well:

(This link takes you to the Apple Podcasts channel. The interview was on September 12th.) https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hold-these-truths-with-dan-crenshaw/id1498149200


And now,...

https://youtu.be/yxzViUl41lA?t=23

I swear Ben Shapiro snuck into my head last night and stole his first 10 minutes of Tuesday's show directly from my own personal thoughts over the last several weeks. Now, I personally know some people with these signs up, and they are good people. I just wonder how it is that they don't see how smug and self-righteous this comes off as being, and how unhelpful it is. 

The rest of the program, while not couched in the respect required to change minds, I still thought was a good demonstration of genuine discussions that need to be had versus what worthless discussions end up being had instead.

If you don't watch it, then at least here is where it seems he's getting his numbers. His point is that if you bring these things up, you are "anti-science," despite all of the societal benefit that could be had in bringing these things up as we pursue other countermeasures:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1758-5899.12295

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2018EA000401

https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickmichaels/2013/07/25/reduce-u-s-carbon-emissions-to-zero-and-the-temperature-decrease-by-2100-will-be-undetectable/#5eff706a3909 (the actual calculator that they reference has been moved here) 





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Talk to People

The murder of Charlie Kirk has had me in a painful sorrow the last couple of days. Yes, terrible things are happening every day that shouldn't be normal. Parts of society are becoming more nihilistic and deadly every day, and we don't agree on what's causing it or how to stop it. But Charlie's assassination should have been met with universal and unequivocal mourning and condemnation. The fact that it wasn't is, to me, indicative of a new and heartbreaking low. How are we to find an off-ramp or come to an understanding of society's ills when the very thing that would solve it (civil public debate) has been flatly rejected?  Charlie was out there doing exactly what many of us wish we had the guts to do - civily engaging face-to-face. Debating. Standing for things he believed in, with an outstretched hand.  And THAT was intolerable. He was a "platform for hate and ignorance." He "got what he advocated for." He was an "extremist."  I a...
Read more

Remember that whole “little brother” analogy?

Remember back in 2020 when I talked about little brothers coming out swinging when they feel like big brother gets away with changing the rules at will? When they feel like there’s no adult who will set things straight? I don’t like this. I’m not cheering for it. But it’s coming. And this is the best representation I know of from the perspective of the little brother. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/making-the-argument-with-nick-freitas/id1506127536?i=1000657445015
Read more

Gell-Mann Amnesia

Image
 Michael Crichton (yes, that one) made an observation almost twenty years ago. He described something he coined as the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect: " Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect [...]  Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate ab...
Read more