Meanwhile on Fox News … and other right wing media

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 213
  • Views: 8K
4thgenheel said:
the quote is part of a longer answer that she gave during a dialogue at a live event honoring MLK Jr. in early 2019.

it wasn't some sort of press release or position statement. context matters.

climate change is already causing dire circumstances all over the globe, she was right to issue a strong warning.
Click to expand...
Ok. Marking my calendar for January 2030 to see if the world "ends." Kind of like oil running out by 1999 or "we only have ten years to save the oceans." Ted Danson in 1988.
 
Ramrouser said:
12 years? None other than the progressive princess AOC. In January 2019, Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez stated: "The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don't address climate change." Apparently, her number of "12 years" came from an October 2018 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The report stated that by 2030, emissions would need to be cut by 45% to keep global warming to a maximum of 1.5 degrees C above pre-industrial levels.
Click to expand...
That was in 2019. She had just been elected. Unlike your politicos, who regress the longer they stay in DC, and become ever more idiotic, AOC has improved herself considerably.

Back in 2019, I disagreed with her on a lot of things. In 2025, I disagree with her on less. That's not because I've changed. It's because she learned a lot.

And try reading the sentence slightly differently: The world is going to end if we don't address climate change in 12 years. That makes sense and is more or less correct. It won't end in 12 years, but if we reach that tipping point, it may well be irretrievable and we will be on course for severe, severe pain as a species.

Here's what you don't seem to grasp, probably because you don't care or don't listen: the Amazon rain forest is the engine of life on this planet. It could shrivel and die. It's called "dieback," and it is estimated -- according to some models -- to be extremely likely by mid century if the carbon in the atmosphere isn't reduced. We're not reducing it at all. We are slowing the growth of emissions, kind of.

The other thing you don't seem to understand: melting permafrost. That has the potential to make climate change even worse by releasing unfathomable quantities of carbon into the atmosphere. If even half the carbon in the permafrost were to be released, it's likely game over for the human race. 3/4 of it would definitely be game over. Guess how long it will take the earth to hit those points of no return at current emissions rates?
 
4thgenheel said:
re: AOC's "12 years" statement, which of course ramrouser is taking out of context......

Ocasio-Cortez was referencing a major global report issued in October of 2018 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nation’s scientific authority on climate change.

The year 2030 came up prominently in that report, marking the first year that the planet is likely to warm by 1.5 degrees Celsius (the report provided a range of between 2030 and 2052). This temperature was set as an idealistic goal during the 2015 Paris Climate Accord. It is widely seen among climate scientists as a marker, beyond which long-term, irreversible change begins to occur, but does not signify the end of the world.

“Every extra bit of warming matters, especially since warming of 1.5°C or higher increases the risk associated with long-lasting or irreversible changes, such as the loss of some ecosystems,” according to Hans-Otto Pörtner, a Co-Chair of the IPCC.

In order to keep warming within the 1.5 degree range and limit the effects—which get considerably worse as warming approaches and passes 2 degrees—the report states that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) must decline by 45% by 2030 and be essentially zero by 2050. A popular narrative that resulted from the report was that we only have 12 years to avoid the dire consequences of climate change.

The report certainly does not say that the world will end in 12 years, but it does warn that if there has not been a major shift in human’s reliance on fossil fuels for energy, land, and industrial systems by that time, we may begin living in a world that is more hostile to our current way of life – with higher sea levels, hotter heat waves and more extreme disasters. A lot of people will die.
Click to expand...
Could we switch to a credible term? Climate change is not going to end the world. It's going to affect the thee ability of the world to support our current forms of life. That doesn't even mean the end of life. Life has already survived major vulcanism, major meteor strikes and ice ages. Keep perspective. This really is all about you.
 
They have given billions of dollars to mental health and the homeless population. A lot of them don't want to take the programs, a lot of them don't want to get the help that is necessary. You can't give them a choice. Either you take the resources that we're going to give you and — or you decide that you are going to be locked up in jail. That's the way it has to be now.

BRIAN KILMEADE (FOX HOST): Or involuntary lethal injection.

JONES: Yeah.

KILMEADE : Or something. Just kill them.

EARHARDT: Yeah, Brian, why did it have to get to this point?

www.mediamatters.org

Fox News host on mentally ill people who commit crimes: “Just kill them”

www.mediamatters.org www.mediamatters.org
 
Ramrouser said:
Ok. Marking my calendar for January 2030 to see if the world "ends." Kind of like oil running out by 1999 or "we only have ten years to save the oceans." Ted Danson in 1988.
Click to expand...
Did you read the other post siting the actual source? The source didn't say the world was going to end, they said that it was a tipping point.

So, AOC got it wrong. You have said that you believe the science so how did AOC getting it wrong in this case really make a difference in anyone's life.

What percentage of the population do you believe actually heard her say that or read about it?

I really like AOC and I didn't know about it.
 
altmin said:
They have given billions of dollars to mental health and the homeless population. A lot of them don't want to take the programs, a lot of them don't want to get the help that is necessary. You can't give them a choice. Either you take the resources that we're going to give you and — or you decide that you are going to be locked up in jail. That's the way it has to be now.

BRIAN KILMEADE (FOX HOST): Or involuntary lethal injection.

JONES: Yeah.

KILMEADE : Or something. Just kill them.

EARHARDT: Yeah, Brian, why did it have to get to this point?

www.mediamatters.org

Fox News host on mentally ill people who commit crimes: “Just kill them”

www.mediamatters.org www.mediamatters.org
Click to expand...
The only requirement to work at fox news is to be a fucking idiot who is willing to carry the company line.

Being blonde and kissing trumps ass are only secondary requirement.
 
Ramrouser said:
Ok. Marking my calendar for January 2030 to see if the world "ends." Kind of like oil running out by 1999 or "we only have ten years to save the oceans." Ted Danson in 1988.
Click to expand...
Hysteria and Delusion. Most of the Earth's history is without ice caps. It would break our economy. Wars would break out (ask the Pentagon). But ocean beachfront property in Fuquay-Varina would be prime.

CO2 has no political preferences. Like honey badger, it does what it does and doesn't care - here, CO2 absorbs and retains infrared rays (i.e., heat). We've (fossil fuel burning) increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere from 280 ppm to 430 ppm. That has increased the average temperature in the Earth's troposphere by > 1.5°C. The effects and interaction with ocean cycles, where patterns are complex. There are more extremes, including summer heat waves, droughts, floods, more powerful hurricanes (more CAT 3-5), more snowstorms. The combination of a La Niña this winter and CC should disrupt the polar vortex quite a few times throwing down extreme cold and snowstorms.

Yes, power plants can potentially be run by fusion in 20 years.

Clean energy and water industries will provide hundreds of thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions in earnings. Why let China corner the market?
 
UNCatTech said:
The current energy secretary?

How does this align with trumps position that it is a hoax, his undoing of previous efforts, like stopping wind turbines in mid construction, his stepping away from international agreements, etc?

If this administration helps to advance the solution, I will give them credit. I've not yet read much to support that position.

As for subsidies... how long are we going to subsidize the fossil fuel industry, farmers, etc.?
Click to expand...
The current Energy Secretary.

The current Energy Secretary said:
  • Fusion is just around the corner; commercially viable and producing electricity in 8-12 years
  • That wind and solar will never solve our energy needs; that it’s time to cut all subsidies to each one
  • He did say that climate change is real and that it’s at least partially man-made. He also said we have plenty of time to deal with any adverse effects; and, that technology will help us “de-carbon” the atmosphere.
  • AI will work wonders and solve fusion and more.
  • In the part I watched he didn’t say a word about subsidies for fossil fuels. He just yammered on-and-on about wind and solar subsidies.
 
Last edited:
Ramrouser said:
"The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don't address climate change." That's how AOC (not me) described the above report to her millions of followers and fans - thereby unnecessarily scaring them about the world coming to an end. Are her fans and followers likely going to get their information from her or through some IPCC report?
Click to expand...
So ONE example of “fear mongering” (which as it turns out is a pretty damn weak one) versus the daily constant bombardment of it on other societal topics via Fox “News” and other MAGA outlets. Cool. If you’re trying to make a point, it appears you’ve failed miserably. Again.
 
Last edited:
UNCatTech said:
The only requirement to work at fox news is to be a fucking idiot who is willing to carry the company line.

Being blonde and kissing trumps ass are only secondary requirement.
Click to expand...
Apparently being able to carry out a Naziesque purge of undesirable human beings certianly helps you climb the corporate latter. MSNBC fired a guest contributor for stupidly saying maybe Charlie Kirk was killed by a stray bullet from an excited fan on the same day that a Fox host called for mass murder without as much of a bat of an eyelash from anyone at Fox or the media in general.
 
Zoo_View said:
The current Energy Secretary.

The current Energy Secretary said:
  • Fusion is just around the corner; commercially viable and producing electricity in 8-12 years
  • That wind and solar will never solve our energy needs; that it’s time to cut all subsidies to each one
  • He did say that climate change is real and that it’s at least partially man-made. He also said we have plenty of time to deal with any adverse effects; and, that technology will help us “de-carbon” the atmosphere.
  • AI will work wonders and solve fusion and more.
  • In the part I watched he didn’t say a word about subsidies for fossil fuels. He just yammered on-and-on about wind and solar subsidies.
Click to expand...
That's very interesting considering trumps approach. Hopefully it's true.
 
UNCatTech said:
That's very interesting considering trumps approach. Hopefully it's true.
Click to expand...
I’m obviously not writing this well.

The Energy Secretary is not interested in doing anything to combat climate change. He doesn’t see any urgency in dealing with warming or the melting of glaciers and polar ice. He wants wind and solar projects either halted or not started.

Regarding fusion, basically, AI will solve any issues and help make fusion commercially viable.

He also believes fission is a viable source despite almost no power companies or other potential investors wanting to build fission plants in the US.

He only differs from Trump in that he does acknowledge climate change as being real; but, he’s not going to do anything to slow it.

He definitely believes fossil fuels are the best way forward.
 
Zoo_View said:
I’m obviously not writing this well.

The Energy Secretary is not interested in doing anything to combat climate change. He doesn’t see any urgency in dealing with warming or the melting of glaciers and polar ice. He wants wind and solar projects either halted or not started.

Regarding fusion, basically, AI will solve any issues and help make fusion commercially viable.

He also believes fission is a viable source despite almost no power companies or other potential investors wanting to build fission plants in the US.

He only differs from Trump in that he does acknowledge climate change as being real; but, he’s not going to do anything to slow it.

He definitely believes fossil fuels are the best way forward.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I didn't read it well.

I obviously took it incorrectly. He really does align with trump's do nothing approach.

I am hopefully for fusion or more nuclear.
I got off track on the subsidies point. My thinking is that wind and solar may be past the tipping point and not really need the subsidies, I guess his point was more they can't survive without them.

Thanks for sticking with me. 😁
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top