Things you won't read on Fox News

In comparsion bahahaha

Select to expand quote

remery said..
Once trusted faces on the news, meteorologists now brave threats, insults and slander online from conspiracy theorists and climate change deniers who accuse them of faking or even fixing the weather.

Key points:
Social media users claim weather bureaus around the world have been making up information
Australian's BoM has been falsely accused of doctoring temperature records
Globally there has been a rise in climate change denial - particularly among far-right supporters

amp.abc.net.au/article/102342754

Interesting comments. Key question is why do you believe the ABC article is accurate? Have you considered it may have been written in a biased manner? The article does not include comments from the scientists questioning the BoM methodologies, did you pick this up? If so how have you decided you are getting a balanced report on the issue?

I am familiar with many of the claims around the BoM's activities / methods being called into question and many of them have merit. None of them use the term "doctoring" as the article promotes, they question the methodologies used and the inherent errors and uncertainties they produce. For instance the BoM does not adhere to internationally accepted standards for temperature recording.

The ABC article references data obtained under the FOI act. It omits that it took 5 years and numerous court cases to force the BoM to release that data. And it has only released a small fraction. The data released does indicate some issues around warming bias in the transition from murcury to digital readings. But more importantly the resistance to make this information public is what drives the conspiracy theroists and the plainly one sided reports from a national broadcaster.

Exactly what is "climate change denial"? It is a very subjective term. Does it mean anyone who calls out potentially sub standard practices? Also what is "far right"? One could say that anything viewed from the far left is far right.....

This is a link to Morahassey's site that questions the BoM data. She is a qualified scientist and specialises in data analysis. You can make of it what you will, but many of the arguments she presents are compelling. I find her blog gets too emotional at times, but her analysis is often hard to refute. There are plenty of other experts who have called out the BoM and its practices or results. I guess to many they are simply far right science deniers. jennifermarohasy.com/2023/05/averaging-last-seconds-versus-bureau-peer-review/?fbclid=IwAR1uUrsi1zXWnS1_Pw9-advASTLIQR6h_5NcARyLli3vY2ucKr2-y4oNmaE

Select to expand quote

remery said..

Right, and who said that and what was thier support for it? It could have been said by Mr Bean for all I know. It does not actually challange anything presented by her. no idea what the graph is for. The discussion was on thermometer v temp probe readings, not the homogenised data sets, which admittedly also shows problems. I will happily look at anything scientific and supported by logicial data and analysis, which that is not.

Select to expand quote

Shifu said..
I'm curious. Has anyone here in this thread been involved in university level research themselves as part or a Masters or PhD program?

What?

Select to expand quote

Shifu said..
I'm curious. Has anyone here in this thread been involved in university level research themselves as part or a Masters or PhD program?

How do you mean... "involved"?

Select to expand quote

Shifu said..
I'm curious. Has anyone here in this thread been involved in university level research themselves as part or a Masters or PhD program?

I have. Although in Engineering. It tends to be a little different to other science acedemia.

Tucker has 130mill+ views on his crappy video done with poor production quality and little important info.

If he starts producing regular content and starts breaking new stories that not even fox would let him cover. His content might get billions of views.

Cry all you want, hate all you want, twitter or rumble will not censor him. The people are desperate to hear the truth, not swamp propaganda.

Select to expand quote

go get boosted

death threat???

Select to expand quote

TonyAbbott said..

go get boosted

death threat???

You sound vaccinated

The thing is certain people are so adamant that they are right on the pulse of exactly what mischief the governments and UN, world bank or whatever other organisation. If that were the case they would be very wealthy as they'd know exactly what shares to invest in. Don't give me the crap that they morally object to it because, very few would legitimately turn down the opportunity to make a heap of money.

Select to expand quote

remery said..

Interesting. The map shows it is evenly spread thoughout the population demograpic and not confined to certain areas.

Did you know the majority of those were suicides? Of the remaining that were homicides over 60% are black and hispanic violence.

Also the majority of the deaths were from handguns, including mass shootings.

There is an epidemic of gun voilence for sure, but it is confined to certain cultures.

Select to expand quote

D3 said..

Paradox said..

remery said..

Interesting. The map shows it is evenly spread thoughout the population demograpic and not confined to certain areas.

Did you know the majority of those were suicides? Of the remaining that were homicides over 60% are black and hispanic violence.

Also the majority of the deaths were from handguns, including mass shootings.

There is an epidemic of gun voilence for sure, but it is confined to certain cultures.

yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/texas-guns-and-stats

Unsurprisingly, states with more permissive gun laws have more firearm fatalities and mass shootings than states with more restrictive gun laws.

Interestingly, more guns per capita in a state does not necessarily equal higher rates of gun violence. (Think the states that have more remote populations and strong hunting culture)


But in large parts of the country, as many as one in 3 households have at least one firearm on the premises. 50% Chance someone elses house your kids visit will have a firearm inside, and with firearm deaths being the leading cause of death in kids, I'd be asking to make sure it was properly locked away

I would be interested to know what age adjusted stats are. It does not clarify.


The blog does bounce around in its filters a lot though. Total gun deaths is meaningless unless you pull out the suicides, which account for about 60%. Obviously gun suicides are going to be higher when people have more access to guns. It doesn't mean overall suicides are down, just they chose a different method.

Child mortality stats on gun deaths I belive are dominated by gang related young male deaths between 15 and 18. Again it is true, but does skew the risk a lot to a certain demographic and cultural causes.

Overview
In 2019, most (78.3 percent) of the 13,927 murder victims for whom supplemental data were received were male. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 1.)
Of the murder victims for whom race was known, 54.7 percent were Black or African American, 42.3 percent were White, and 3.1 percent were of other races. Race was unknown for 234 victims. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 2.)
More than 50 percent (50.6) of all murders for which the UCR Program received supplemental data were single victim/single offender situations. (See Expanded Homicide Data Table 4.)
Of the offenders for whom gender was known, 88.0 percent were male. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 3.)
When the race of the offender was known, 55.9 percent were Black or African American, 41.1 percent were White, and 3.0 percent were of other races. The race was unknown for 4,752 offenders. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 3.)
More than 73 percent (73.7) of the homicides for which the FBI received weapons data in 2019 involved the use of firearms. Handguns comprised 62.1 percent of the firearms used in murder and nonnegligent manslaughter incidents in 2019. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 8.)
In 2019, 28.3 percent of homicide victims were killed by someone they knew other than family members (acquaintance, neighbor, friend, boyfriend, etc.), 13.0 percent were slain by family members, and 9.9 percent were killed by strangers. The relationship between murder victims and offenders was unknown in 48.9 percent of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter incidents. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 10.)
Circumstances were known for 58.8 percent of murders for which supplementary details were reported in 2019. Of those, 43.2 percent of victims were murdered during arguments. Felony-type murders (i.e., murders that occurred in conjunction with the commission of another felony crime such as rape, robbery, burglary, etc.) accounted for 24.6 percent of homicides for which circumstances were known. (Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 11.)
Law enforcement reported 726 justifiable homicides in 2019. Of those, law enforcement officers justifiably killed 340 felons, and private citizens justifiably killed 386 offenders during the commission of crimes.

Select to expand quote

remery said..
I haven't looked at the data but I reckon the suicide rate would be higher when it's so easy with a gun.

You are probably right, however my view is that it would be much more productive to address the issues that are causing this massive increase in teenage suicide rather than the tool. The US is not getting rid of its handguns any time soon.