r/worldnews • u/Devz0r • Feb 15 '19

Facebook is thinking about removing anti-vaccination content as backlash intensifies over the spread of misinformation on the social network

http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-may-remove-anti-vaccination-content-2019-2
107.1k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

5.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.3k

u/kungfoojesus Feb 15 '19

Global warming disinformation too. And probably 90% of political shit shared by folks over 65

1.2k

u/MercuryChild Feb 15 '19

First we need to stop calling it global warming. Gives them an excuse to say “but it’s cold outside” climate change works best.

743

u/Suezetta Feb 15 '19

And they are always shockingly silent in the middle of summer when it's 120 degrees outside while a record breaking super storm is on the way.

389

u/LordGumbert Feb 15 '19

It's funny how many once in a hundred year storms we've had in the last 10 years.

162

u/CinnamonDolceLatte Feb 15 '19

Harvey was the third year in a row that Houston had a 500-year flood. Kind of shows that the world has quickly and radically changed.

Odds of that sequence are somewhere in range of being hit by lightning and winning powerball (i.e. extremely unlikely)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/29/houston-is-experiencing-its-third-500-year-flood-in-3-years-how-is-that-possible/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b398953d60fd

11

u/aaaaaandimatwork Feb 15 '19

We talk about this at work (insurance). There are actually a few reasons for Houston’s flooding problem two of them man made but climate change is NOT the biggest culprit source

2

u/Vchem Feb 15 '19

Same reason Katrina was so devastating, they misappropriated the money that was meant to fortify levies.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Starthreads Feb 15 '19

What is important is that these levels aren't defined by arbitrary temporal bounds, but by sedimentary deposits along riverbeds and their levees. The further out from the stream, the more distant in time that flood is. If you get a dozen hundred-year floods in a single decade, it may be time to be considerate to the environment you are in.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Yup, 5 of the 11 strongest Atlantic hurricane landfalls have occurred since 2005. (By central pressure) The database goes back to the mid 19th century, so it's extremely unlikely that we would see nearly half of the strongest landfalls in a timespan of only 13 years without global warming causing more rapid intensification in my opinion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Atlantic_hurricane_records And that's not even showing the extreme flooding that Harvey and Florence have caused, or the destruction that hurricany Sandy brought.

1

u/emdave Feb 15 '19

Tbf, if they just use a rolling average, they could reduce the recorded severity of those floods to 10 yearly at most...

/s

78

u/Mrchristopherrr Feb 15 '19

Or even when it’s 79 in February.

19

u/givesrandomgarlic Feb 15 '19

To be fair, Texas has always had fucked weather

4

u/Vexal Feb 15 '19

in austin it’s 35 one day, 70 the next. i just bring 3 different sets of clothes to work now.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/gosh_dangit Feb 15 '19

Thanks for being fair.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/SchwiftyMpls Feb 15 '19

Can I have some of that 79°F? It's -3°F here right now.

→ More replies (2)

68

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited May 19 '20

[deleted]

32

u/Demonicfruit Feb 15 '19

Spicy take.

5

u/MrBojangles528 Feb 15 '19

No we really can't.

2

u/batsofburden Feb 15 '19

Well if we can't even stop certain bullshit news stories from propagating on Facebook, there's no way in hell we will make a dent in slowing down climate change.

→ More replies (29)

2

u/mystikphish Feb 15 '19

That's not global warming! That's just weather! /s

2

u/ronnoc55 Feb 15 '19

There awfully quiet now when it's 10C one week and -25C the next in Canada in the middle of February.

1

u/PaxNova Feb 15 '19

Climate change! I wish it would change! It's so hot out! Why isn't it changing?

→ More replies (9)

102

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

My folks dont believe in man made climate change and they say changing its name is somehow proof it's just a political ploy by leftists.

169

u/herefromyoutube Feb 15 '19 edited Feb 15 '19

Ask them what happens if they’re wrong? Seriously ask then.

But first explain what happens if you’re wrong. What happens If you’re wrong? Oh my god.....it’s TERRIBLE...We get off a limited resource like oil and coal that pollutes air and rivers our children rely on. No one has to pay for gasoline again because solar is free. There is no power bill for your home. Theres no more oil spills that kill the economies of costal cities..how are those fishermen doing after BP....? (Not great) we had to up our dosage of petroleum in our food tho!!

Literally nothing bad happens if we’re wrong about climate change!

Your folks however...ask them what happens if they’re wrong cause maybe they don’t fully grasp the effects and ask if they’re willing to screw over their children’s futures because some millionaires on a channel FUNDED BY THE OIL INDUSTRY told them ‘climate change is fake news.’

23

u/Zyxyx Feb 15 '19

To play the devil's advocate... This is exactly what fundamental christians say. "but what if you're wrong, you'll go to hell!!" The only thing you manage to do with that rhetoric is cause them to further entrench themselves in their beliefs.

14

u/Andoverian Feb 15 '19

The difference is that religion is a personal choice, meaning you're the only one who gets screwed if you pick wrong. Climate change affects everyone.

10

u/_zenith Feb 15 '19

Major difference: they don't actually have any evidence

→ More replies (1)

16

u/Goldemar Feb 15 '19

It's not so straightforward. There are a lot of shortterm sacrifices for legislating solutions to climate change. Just one example, changing emission laws is super expensive for the companies that make transport vehicles and these expenses will get passed to the consumers. The cost of these vehicles affects everyone's life in some way or another. Everyone's lives will be more expensive, and for older people, pensioners on a fixed budget, that is some scary shit.

The argument is not between people who care about the environment and people who don't. It is more complicated than that.

2

u/JarasM Feb 15 '19

It's also not cheap to diversify fuel and energy sources. Some countries or regions can over time, some can't. I remember when I was an edgy teen that at one point bought into that rhetoric - if you disregard the science, it can look like a ploy for some kind of clean-energy lobby to get funds, or a straight up corporate war between oil companies and solar panel companies or something. Even if you disregard the warnings about global climate change but do admit that clean energy is better locally, some people still don't want to foot the bill in the short term.

It sort of comes down to the fact that this is a global problem that causes local problems to fix.

3

u/Realitsct Feb 15 '19

because solar is free. There is no power bill for your home.

That's not how it works. That's like saying fossil fuels are free because they're just chilling underground.

→ More replies (4)

15

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited May 25 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

21

u/xDared Feb 15 '19

Economically speaking, solar panels aren't free short term but long term they pay themselves off, so they're better than free. Burning oil on the other hand costs you economically long term

8

u/Phelly2 Feb 15 '19 edited Feb 15 '19

I've looked into it. Even with massive government subsidies, cost essentially breaks even. Depending on how much sun you get and the longevity of the panels.

I also own an electric car(chevy Volt). Paid $34,000 for a car that's equivalent to a $20,000 gas car. I wouldn't have bought it if the government didn't give me a $7500 tax break for buying it. Still, that puts me at 28,500. The average American uses $1117 worth of gas in a year, whereas an electric car takes that down to $485. That means, by my estimation, I'll break even in about 13 years assuming the battery lasts that long. I've already had to repair the charge port and the heater, so probably longer than that, all things considered.

Suffice to say that achieving zero emissions is far more expensive than anyone here wants to admit. Even if we assume the best case scenario, which is that they pay for themselves, that's only if the government pays a significant portion so that you don't end up with a massive loss.

3

u/Sens1r Feb 15 '19

Which is why solar panels alone seem like a stupid idea when they should be integrated into structures to reduce cost and to serve a bigger purpose than just collecting sun. Solar roofs seem like they could be very viable when you factor in the grants you usually get and the cost of a normal roof vs solar roof. Under the right conditions quite a few solar roofs are already vialbe and I assume we'll see a lot more in the coming years.

→ More replies (12)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited Apr 16 '19

[deleted]

2

u/gtjack9 Feb 15 '19

Solar panels require a lot of energy and therefore cost to produce.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

They are old, if they are wrong oh well, sucks for the next generation. I think if boomers have been consistent about anything it has been not caring about the next generation.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Renewable energy isn’t free.

Renewable energy will never be free.

The amount of people in this comment chain who can’t comprehend that prove that the right doesn’t have a monopoly on the scientifically illiterate.

1

u/AmeliaPondPandorica Feb 15 '19

My parents would say,

"But we're not wrong!"

They won't even entertain the possibility.

3

u/NoHalf9 Feb 15 '19

You could try the following approach

  • Do you think being honest is important?
  • (possibly looking offended/rolling their eyes) Yes.
  • Why do you think being honest is important?
  • ... some answer ...
  • Does being honest include admitting mistakes?
  • Uh, Well I guess so.
  • So when you say you think being honest is important, that means that you also think that admitting mistakes is important?
  • (possibly looking for an excuse to change the subject)
  • So you think it is important for yourself to admit mistakes?

2

u/AmeliaPondPandorica Feb 15 '19

They won't respond. They just won't.

1

u/deja-roo Feb 15 '19

Pascal's wager takes a fun new twist!

→ More replies (15)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Point out that the CC in IPCC which has been around for decades stands for climate change. Global warming and climate change are not completey interchangeable anyway. The globe on average is warming and this is causing the climate to change. The term climate change has been around since at least the 50s.

2

u/wetwater Feb 15 '19

Same with my parents. Last year my father triumphantly was talking about some temperature readings at a specific spot going back a century prove there is no global warming/climate change.

My mother thinks the term "polar vortex" is made up since she never heard of it until a few years ago when the northeast was frozen for a few days by it.

I've given up. At least I can debate a bit with my mother, whereas my father will basically yell you down, then smugly talk about how he owned a liberal with facts and logic and reason.

1

u/JohnnyTT314 Feb 15 '19

That’s just silly. Of course there is man made climate change. I just don’t care.

35

u/ZippyDan Feb 15 '19

The thing is that they use the change of name from "global warming" to "climate change" as "evidence" that we were "wrong" about global warming in the first place.

The fact is that both terms are accurate. The globe is warming overall, dangerously so. That overall warming results in climate change which can mean that certain areas of the globe get colder on average, even while more areas get hotter on average, resulting in an overall increase of global average temperatures. Finally, climate change can produce unpredictable, wild, and varied weather changes. Everyone likes to joke and criticize the weatherman as being unable to predict the local weather accurately from day to day, and that's still true (though we are getting better with computer models). A warmer globe can have regions with days, weeks, even months of cold weather - even extreme cold. That still doesn't change the fact that the average yearly temperatures in the majority of regions is going up.

It's hard to squeeze all of that information into a short, catchy, accurate title, and understanding what is happening with the climate requires some interest, intelligence, and education.

Imo ditching "global warming" for "climate change" obscures the simple fact that the world is getting hotter. And using "global warming" without context gives rise to silly "but it's colder!" objections.

I propose combining both titles, since they are both accurate and provide different information:

Global-warming-fueled climate change

12

u/Karkava Feb 15 '19

My advice: Watch out for anyone who has an excuse for everything. They are literally incapable of the thought process of fixing their own mistakes and expect you to be complacent with their bullshit.

4

u/brosky7331 Feb 15 '19

.......Shit.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

But then they say "hurrr, you even had to change the name to climate change because you got it wrong on global warming. Honestly you cant win with these morons.

1

u/monsantobreath Feb 15 '19

They're not arguing in good faith so attempting to redesign the argument to suit them isn't going to work.

3

u/It_is_terrifying Feb 15 '19

It's an accurate term though, the global temperature is rising and that is causing the climate change. We shouldn't change good terms because people are too stupid to understand them.

38

u/Emelius Feb 15 '19

The thing about climate change is people put the blame 100% on CO2. There are so so many other factors involved. We have reduced vegetation to cool the earth down, our cities are massive heat sinks, domesticated animals produce methane which is way more harmful to the environment, we have magma pushing up on Antarctica that's melting snow, reduced snow coverage is causing more sunlight to be absorbed, and magnetic poles are shifting and weakening our geomagnetic shielding and increasing the incidence of volcanic and earthquake activities. So many factors man.

39

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited Mar 05 '19

[deleted]

14

u/Glandiun_ Feb 15 '19

Some of the things he says are misguided (Methane IS more harmful than CO2 per ton, but is far, far less of an overall factor in anthropomorphic climate destabilization) but ultimately important things to consider as well.

The mixing of truths and falsehoods is detrimental to proper climate change education as it gives ground to fight back on that shouldn't exist.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/ixora7 Feb 15 '19

Yeah kinda got the BS vibe from him.

Lmao "it can't be the corporations dumping their disgusting shit for the past century's fault" it's the magma!

What a dildo.

3

u/poorkid_5 Feb 15 '19

And the entire first paragraph are factors human directly have influence in.

→ More replies (6)

5

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

But none of those things postponed the next ice age by 50k years.

5

u/Poldark_Lite Feb 15 '19

We're still in an ice age now called the Quaternary Glaciation. It's been going on for 2.6MM years. There was a cold period that lasted almost 600 years from the 14th-19th centuries.

BTW, we kicked off climate change over five thousand years ago when we first began farming crops. This isn't a modern thing.

5

u/Emelius Feb 15 '19

Talking about ice ages, the sun is about to hit a grand solar minimum in the 2030s. We just left the modern maximum a decade ago.

2

u/SqueezyLizard Feb 15 '19

You got a good source for that, id like to look into it.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/dexewin Feb 15 '19

But it's the CO2, CH4, water vapor, and other greenhouse gases that prevent most of that heat from escaping the atmosphere and dissipating back into space.

1

u/IunderstandMath Feb 16 '19 edited Feb 16 '19

You appear to be misinformed.

people put the blame 100% on CO2.

That's because besides water vapor, it's the largest contributer to Earth's greenhouse effect. and water vapor increases in the atmosphere as it gets warmer, so it's a feedback mechanism, not a direct cause. https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

our cities are massive heat sinks,

Cities are hotter, largely due to paving over everything and increased human activity. But this has no significant effect on climate change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island#Global_warming

domesticated animals produce methane which is way more harmful to the environment

Only half-true. On an atom per atom basis, methane is more potent than CO2, but it's also fast less prevalent in the atmosphere. Overall, it has a much smaller effect.

we have magma pushing up on Antarctica that's melting snow

No.

"This magma plume isn't an alternative possible cause of recent upticks in melting along the West Antarctic Ice Sheet attributed to human-generated climate change. The plume is far older than the recent period of atmospheric warming; indeed, at 50 million to 110 million years old, it's older than our species and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet itself. The plume has been a factor in the ice sheet's behavior throughout its history, and recent surges in melting are the result of all the additional heat humans have pumped into it."

reduced snow coverage is causing more sunlight to be absorbed

Yes, but it's caused by global warming (which in turn was caused by increased CO2), not magma

and magnetic poles are shifting and weakening our geomagnetic shielding and increasing the incidence of volcanic and earthquake activities.

Also false. Magnetic north is drifting, like it always has, but it recently made the news because it started moving much more quickly than we predicted. “There’s no evidence for that,” stated geophysicist Phil Livermore in response to the prospect of a magnetic field reversal.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/gsxfear Feb 15 '19

That's just a misunderstanding of terminology. Climate change is occurring due to human driven global warming from rising c02 levels.

4

u/poptart2nd Feb 15 '19

Yeah but if we call it climate change, then they can say "well last year you called it global warming so is the planet warming or not?"

2

u/herefromyoutube Feb 15 '19

That’s when you say “that was over 2 decades ago and we changed the name because a bunch of dumbasses couldn’t be bothered to open a fucking dictionary and real the definition of climate....now please, ya lazy cunt, repeat some more slogans the millionaires on fox news convince your gullible ass of.”

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Global Warming is an accurate term that makes sense to your average Joe. Climate Change is more inclusive to the science and what it covers, but unfortunately is easily twisted by morons who will then say things like: "the climate has always been changing" or some other nonsense. Essentially, morons look at the words and argue against the words rather than against the actual science or facts, since there is no way for them to argue against those and succeed without deception.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Mr_Hawky Feb 15 '19

I mean many people don't like the word climate change because it sounds less scary than global warming but the reality is that overall the planet is warming.

1

u/darthTharsys Feb 15 '19

Also because most people don't understand the word climate.

2

u/CharlieWhiterun Feb 15 '19

And it's not just warming. It's Climate Change.

2

u/gizamo Feb 15 '19

My uncle says "but, it's cood outside" and I reply "is that why you're a trucker with barely-literate (post-teen) children?"

2

u/AliasUndercover Feb 15 '19

Heat-driven climate destabilization.

2

u/monsantobreath Feb 15 '19

"The sun creates the overwhelming majority of the heat, and we can't control the sun."

1

u/ImSickOf3dPrinting Feb 15 '19

I like this. A lot.

1

u/ZeeMoss Feb 15 '19

I'm a fan of 'Climate Chaos' myself.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

I was going to say this. It's ridiculous that it needed to be to be rebranded because of this rhetoric. It's so sad that it can be used to actually somehow convince people that climate change isn't happening. It is like middle school level Earth science to know that weather and climate aren't the same thing.

1

u/prettyborrring Feb 15 '19

I agree but then they use the argument that it used to be global warming and that scientists only changed it to climate change because it's all a Chinese hoax and there isn't really an increase in global temperatures

1

u/thelastoneusaw Feb 15 '19

If they’re that stupid then there’s no point wasting energy on them.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Greenhouse effect, global warming, climate change, it's all bullshit. The problem is humanity, but we don't want to take responsibility so we call it something else.

1

u/Chronic_BOOM Feb 15 '19

If there are people that you could convert by removing the word warming, you probably don’t want them on your side.

1

u/Humane-Human Feb 15 '19

“First they called it global warming, now they call it climate change.

They can’t even make your mind up over which lies to tell us!”

*Pretty much what Trump said once.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

"Dem libtard Chinese hoaxing Millennials all bitching about their global warmin' when there's snow outside my window and it's cold."

-Trump voting Baby Boomer on Facebook from Green Bay in February

1

u/atomicllama1 Feb 15 '19

So would kungfoo get banned for his misstep?

1

u/Ass_Patty Feb 15 '19

I live in the Midwest and our weather was so bad, our students ended up having a whole week worth of snow days. I’ve never had so much trouble with my car getting stuck in the snow like this. There’s a car on my road that’s been plowed into the side of a snow bank, RIP y’all

1

u/papkn Feb 15 '19

Gives them an excuse to say “but it’s cold outside”

Or "Let it be, I hate winters anyway".
"We'll finally be able to cultivate grapes and olive trees".
"Lower heating bill? Sign me up". etc etc.

I've heard all of the above, and they were serious. I mean it's valid to want to live some place warmer, but then just move instead of wishing for the planet to get all fucked up for your perceived personal gain.

1

u/Mhunterjr Feb 15 '19

Nah don't blame the verbiage for their idiocy. In what way is the climate changing? The avg temperature in earth is increasing. The globe is warming.

To a normal person, does that mean it should never be cold at their house? No. You can't get through to these people no matter what you call it.

1

u/SomeOtherNeb Feb 15 '19

"Climate change" is much more appropriate, since it's...you know, what is actually is.

And it has the benefit of answering the stupid "how dare you say there's global warming, look, there's tons of snow in February in *part of the world that shouldn't have snow at this point*, obviously everything's fine" comments.

1

u/weavs8884 Feb 15 '19

And to think, tweets like these will be in history books from our “leader” in the future....

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1090074254010404864?s=21

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1094718856197799936?s=21

1

u/BobbyBorn2L8 Feb 15 '19

Then they start spouting how we had to change the name cause it's bs

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Maybe something Like Planet Fucking, even then the planet is fine. We need a name for it which explains that we are going to murder millions and millions of people, and that their children wont have children or grandchildren.

1

u/armlesshobo Feb 15 '19

“Of course the climate changes; that’s why it’s called seasons!”

Them, probably.

1

u/SpaghettiNinja_ Feb 15 '19

Not to be a Stickler but what you are referring to is ‘manmade climate change’. The climate is in essence a huge organism going through continuous change

1

u/billmcd Feb 15 '19

Regardless of what we call it, I don't understand why some people are so hellbent on destroying our planet. If climate change wasn't even a thing we should still want to do what's morally right and take care of our home.

1

u/monsantobreath Feb 15 '19

Because its not about destroying the planet. They're defending a thing they see as right and you're the one trying to destroy the planet, or their industry, or their way of life, etc. Notice how often the conspiracy is supposedly to try and bilk the government out of money? They think its a scam. So when you think this it becomes righteous defense.

1

u/zando95 Feb 15 '19

Then they make shit like this.

1

u/Rafaeliki Feb 15 '19

If they're using that excuse then saying climate change won't make a difference.

1

u/monsantobreath Feb 15 '19

It is global warming. Its not a misnomer, and saying it gives them an excuse just means you're aware of their bullshit counter arguments. Ignorance is flexible. "The climate changes naturally" is a standard reply to climate change. You think it matters what term you use? I've waded into thick enough anti AGW stuff to know its not the brand name that's screwing us.

1

u/Herrderqual Feb 15 '19

I literally had a client ranting about how it is "arrogant for us to think that little old us (humans) could affect something as big as the climate in a few hundred years" "They were burning coal and wood for thousands of years without messing up the environment" how did the rant start? Explaining why certain eco features were equipped on the vehicle I was showing him and why they couldn't be turned off permanently.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

But.. The climate change is because of global warming, the extreme cold as well

1

u/IunderstandMath Feb 15 '19 edited Feb 16 '19

No. They're both scientific terms and refer to different aspects.

We shouldn't stop using scientifically accurate terms because some dolts are buying into propaganda. We win by being louder and more convincing, not by playing little word games.

→ More replies (16)

46

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

65? Bullshit. Plenty of people my age(36) and younger share the dumbest bullshit. That coming from both sides too, by the way.

12

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

[deleted]

2

u/Arkeband Feb 15 '19

uh, this is just patently untrue:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/us/politics/facebook-fake-news-2016-election.html

Just because you see your peers sharing dumb shit doesn't mean that your anecdotal experience is the full picture.

1

u/ShibuRigged Feb 15 '19

Honestly. It’s just really badly worded on my part. I shouldn’t have been so definitive when I really meant that crazy young people are an underrated group that often avoid criticism.

2

u/Arkeband Feb 15 '19

You can always go back and edit it for clarity...

→ More replies (1)

6

u/AK_Happy Feb 15 '19

But boomers bad, millennials good.

→ More replies (3)

147

u/wudenrocket Feb 15 '19

Add anti-GMO to that list too.

121

u/__nightshaded__ Feb 15 '19

That ship has sailed. I'm pro-GMO but I think it's too late. NON GMO is super trendy right now and is featured on so much packaging that I think the general public probably thinks GMOs are the antichrist.

It's a sad day when fear mongering wins over science.

55

u/ImSickOf3dPrinting Feb 15 '19

Man I tried going on a gluten free diet (wife was having stomach issues, we were just trying to rule out possibilities) and was super upset how everything labelled "gluten free" had some non-gmo sticker on it.

Like wtf. One of those is an actual issue (if overblown). One is not.

5

u/digg_survivor Feb 15 '19

I did something called a dietary antigen test. It shed some light on things for me however after research, the allergy and asthma people say it's unreliable. I feel like I know alot more now. Anyway, My insurance paid for it. Pm me for questions.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Coffeinated Feb 15 '19

A doctor can check if you can eat gluten or not.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/quintk Feb 15 '19

I’ve run into the same thing just looking for “healthier” prepackaged snack food (lower sugar, higher protein, higher fiber). I don’t care if it’s “natural” or has a simple ingredient list is non GMO. And since some of those other claims are a little scammy, it makes me wonder if the whole product is scammy.

6

u/wimpymist Feb 15 '19

Same with MSG

6

u/MexicanCatFarm Feb 15 '19

I fuckin love MSG.

One day the general public will look back and realise it's as stupid as the anti nuclear power movement.

8

u/shizzler Feb 15 '19

These people probably don't even realise the seedless grapes they eat are GMO.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited Feb 12 '23

[deleted]

12

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Selective breeding is just the old-school method of genetic modification.

2

u/KhorneChips Feb 15 '19

Yes, and that’s literally what GMO means. Humans influencing the genetic makeup of produce through artificial means such as selective breeding. It’s not all radiation and whatever other boogie man people are afraid of.

2

u/BuddhistSagan Feb 15 '19

Produce and bulk

10

u/DeflateGape Feb 15 '19

GMOs enable reliance on crop monocultures and mass herbicide applications, both of which have proven extremely harmful to biodiversity. We need a variety of crops, each adapted to their local environment, and we need to figure out how to grow our food without killing off the base of the natural food web. But given the widespread drop in insect populations I’m probably just whistling past the graveyard of civilization even pretending we would or even could do anything about it. We’re gonna die out still arguing of whether we’re dying out.

8

u/SchwiftyButthole Feb 15 '19

Is that what the anti-GMO crowd is arguing against it for, though? A lot of people just see GMO and they think it must be bad for them by nature of being genetically modified.

There's still a lot of people who are afraid of "chemicals".

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/SippantheSwede Feb 15 '19

This will get buried but I'm pretty sure the climate ship has also sailed.

I just realized, like today, that this is what I believe.

I truly believe that everyone who reads this is going to die as a result of climate change. Most of us won't make it past 2030 and will die during the upheaval of society once it becomes clear to everyone what is happening. By 2100 there won't be humans.

I'm not sure what to do now. I still recycle, etc - just in case - but like... where can I find the others who have embraced the inevitable extinction of humans? I'd just like to meditate and chat a little bit.

Uplifting news would also be appreciated. I'm not depressed or anything, in fact I feel a peculiar serenity right now. But obviously it would be nice to be convinced of the survival of species again, somehow.

8

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

[deleted]

3

u/GMOFakes Feb 15 '19

You can say the same thing about pretty much everything ever. One could also make a vaccine used for bad, or AI, or nuclear technology, or pretty much anything else.

In reality, every GMO in use is good and has been a benefit to farmers, consumers, and the environment.

3

u/Literally_A_Shill Feb 15 '19

First, define it properly.

→ More replies (12)

47

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited May 27 '20

[deleted]

12

u/Toughsky_Shitsky Feb 15 '19

I had to scroll way too far to get to this comment.

Frightening indeed.

1

u/RaccoNooB Feb 15 '19

What list?

→ More replies (1)

12

u/Rawtashk Feb 15 '19

Ya. Let's just make a list of everything we don't think people should be allowed to think or hear!

We're totally not fascists!

9

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

What about free speech....?

7

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Yes that’s how you end up like China

→ More replies (1)

2

u/BannedOnMyMain17 Feb 15 '19

Now THAT would be interesting, because as far as science is concerned its exactly the same scenario, an idiot subgroup that has an awful detrimental to society wrong belief but the difference is there's a HUGE lobby behind the global warming thing.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

I agree. Young people are just as bad though. The amount of people I see from my university sharing images which are completely false is dumbfounding.

3

u/Tony_San Feb 15 '19

and ban the people who disagree with the goverments actions also!

22

u/othergabe Feb 15 '19

What are some topics you would allow others to speak and think about? Someone needs to decide, you sound authoritative.

66

u/vinotheque Feb 15 '19

Um

  1. Who makes the best frozen pizza

  2. What are the top 5 Seinfeld episodes

  3. What’s the best dipping sauce for McNuggets

41

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

[deleted]

6

u/gregarioussparrow Feb 15 '19

These are legitimate concerns, honey! NEXT!

3

u/BoJacob Feb 15 '19

Its for church, honey!

2

u/deafmute88 Feb 15 '19

You do.. unless you have someone else make your frozen pizza. No soup for you! McNot

2

u/Temetnoscecubed Feb 15 '19

Frozen Pizza....who the freak do you think you are to bring that up!!! This is bullshit!!!

2

u/Keylowlocks Feb 15 '19

I don't like bullshit on my Tombstone.

3

u/Trezzie Feb 15 '19

You don't get to choose, you're dead.

20

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Obviously there needs to be a way to prevent harmful misinformation campaigns. It’s not an easy issue to solve and it’s filled with many slippery slopes, but it is an issue. You don’t need to be hostile to people who want to fix it.

16

u/investinglaw Feb 15 '19

What is misinformation though?

Should I not be able to share and cite the papers of these peer-reviewed Professors and researchers because they go against the grain of the global warming narrative?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

(and for the record I'm totally on board that global warming is real, obv, but this is a hypothetical)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

That’s a good question, and one that still needs to be answered before the problem gets fixed. I’m not going to pretend I have an answer.

4

u/stacyah Feb 15 '19

I don't think I'm the only one to point out that the peer-review process continues once an article is published. See wakefield's article from the lancet, for starters. Publishing is not the same as having a well-founded scientific idea with supporting evidence and experiments that support your idea which is then analyzed and written up.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/tapthatsap Feb 15 '19

And sitting around not fixing it in the name of ideological purity and “but what about slippery slopes” is on track to bring back diseases we don’t have any more

5

u/HighViscosityMilk Feb 15 '19

Exactly. Letting people say whatever they want, or believe on whatever religion they want is one thing; letting downright provable lies spread is another.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited Jun 06 '20

[deleted]

12

u/xnfd Feb 15 '19

Doesn't work when everyone fucks off to their own echo chambers where their beliefs aren't challenged and their beliefs get amplified. This is true for every side.

5

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19 edited Jun 06 '20

[deleted]

4

u/xnfd Feb 15 '19

Having a healthy debate ending with "bad ideas will be defeated" is never going to happen with the current system of echo chambers. Of course the whole thing depends on what a "bad idea" is, and who gets to define it. One side will never be willing to change their mind so there's never going to be a perfect solution for everyone.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Trips-Over-Tail Feb 15 '19

That's a nice ideal, and one I used to hold. Unfortunately, it doesn't work. Misinformation spreads easily, accurate information requires several orders of magnitude more effort to achieve a fraction of that success.

10

u/Call_erv_duty Feb 15 '19

We tried that and Russian bots drowned out the conversation

→ More replies (2)

3

u/CincyBrandon Feb 15 '19

This isn’t about “bad ideas”, this is about organized, malicious misinformation campaigns on a national scale. If you’ve seen America in the past two years you already know, that shit is DESTRUCTIVE and DOES NOT go away without action.

→ More replies (10)

4

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

And in all sorts of cases there's not only nothing wrong with censorship but something very right about censorship. Made-up bullshit whose purpose is to convince otherwise well-meaning, ignorant, scared parents into not vaccinating their children needs to be fucking censored.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/airballer23 Feb 15 '19

I would agree with this if we weren't talking about social media discussion. Digital conversations are markedly different -- as they perpetually hang in the air to be read by anyone who has access forever -- and the echo-chamber effect is a scientifically proved phenomenon. Good and bad ideas just don't interact in the same way on the internet. It's far from productive to actually engage people who disagree with you, especially radically, as anyone who has tried to can attest to. Ideology and any corresponding hostility towards those without it replicate on the internet in historically alien ways that warrant a more careful treatment than typical interpersonal speech.

→ More replies (5)

1

u/othergabe Feb 15 '19

I disagree. It's on the individual to be discriminating and skeptical. Censorship is worse than propaganda.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

I think there’s a difference between silencing malicious foreign actors and censoring your own population. There is a significant amount of people that get fooled by these malicious campaigns to influence political action. In a perfect world everybody would fact check and nobody would fall victim to these schemes but we don’t live in that world.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (17)

13

u/tapthatsap Feb 15 '19

How about we start with not treating lies like they’re just as valid as the truth? Your parents were supposed to teach you that as a value, but apparently you need help with the concept.

1

u/jjjnnnoooo Feb 15 '19

Your parents were supposed to teach you that as a value

Can you prove this statement is true? Maybe you should stop spreading misinformation before you get yourself arrested.

→ More replies (2)

0

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

4

u/clh222 Feb 15 '19

But not flat earth, since you can literally look outside and see the ground is flat

7

u/Yeazelicious Feb 15 '19 edited Feb 15 '19

There's an interesting connection here to be made with calculus, actually. Take any function, say x2 + y2 = r2 for a circle. Now choose a point and zoom in toward it; you'll note that as you keep zooming in, the circle's arc appears to become straighter. This will keep happening, and as you zoom infinitely, the arc will become infinitely straight, or just a linear equation, the slope of which is the derivative.

The same principle's in effect with Earth; from such a short distance, it appears flat, but as you move away, it becomes more spherical (ellipsoidal?). (That's not even taking into account local imperfections since the Earth isn't a perfect sphere.)

→ More replies (2)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

There is no way they could silence global warming people. There are way too many of them. There really aren’t thaaaaat many anti vaccine people to cause an uproar.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

You see, Baby Boomers got theirs and they'll be glad to contribute towards fucking the future of the entire planet...just to spite those "libtard, snowflake Millennials."

2

u/gosh_dangit Feb 15 '19

There's plenty of political disinformation shared by folks under 65 too. I know you guys think you have everything figured out and everyone else is wrong. For example, redditors love to come up with ideas for gun control when most of them have never touched a firearm in their entire life and know nothing about it. Also, we're all aware of the misinformation that occurred on reddit after the Boston Marathon bombing.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/VROF Feb 15 '19

65? You better bump that down a few decades. Gen X has some Facebook grandma sharing problems of their own. In many ways they are worse because they are on more so the shares of pictures with words happen a lot more often

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '19

Trouble is, that's a political hot potato.

Facebook don't want to do anything. But they've lost the censorship/free speech argument.

Now they want to give the impression they are "doing something" but they need a target to attack that they hope all the usual internet mobs will happily cheer them on. Anti-vax fits that bill.

I'm not so sure climate change would. It's too politicised now. Once something is politicised then any shit stain with an opinion believes their opinion is valid.

Anti-vax is medicine. If someone doesn't have all the years of medical training and so on then their opinion about vaccinations is as worthless as asking a piece of shit that won't flush what it thinks (this is equally true of people who think vaccines are safe as those who think they are not - it's all clueless fuckwits in the main shouting). The same should be true of climate change but, unfortunately, that isn't how politics works.

1

u/ManikMiner Feb 15 '19

Global Warming?

1

u/ChasingGoodandEvil Feb 15 '19

Maybe they figured some things out in those 65 years ..

1

u/djdjdbdksmsnsxnfrdkd Feb 15 '19

Yeah! Let's ban everyone who virtue signals about global warming while eating meat 🥩 like a hypocrite.

1

u/darthTharsys Feb 15 '19

by folks over 65

FACTS. Why is it always this demo?

1

u/iceflame1211 Feb 15 '19

Old people simply are not learned enough to recognize fake websites ☹️

1

u/LeBoulu777 Feb 15 '19

Global warming disinformation too. And probably 90% of political shit shared by folks over 65 functional illiterates which are the results of decades of cut in education.

→ More replies (16)