The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label Bill Nye. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Nye. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Fox News's O'Reilly Busted Again; Tucker Carlson Throws A Tantrum

Yesterday we published a piece which included Fox News's most recent and most blatant example of booking "fake" guest for spewing utter lies on its most popular news shows (e.g. O'Reilly, Hannity). 

The short story about the 39 second YouTube segment which follows is: this guest is an outright liar, convicted and NOT in any way an official for Sweden.

First view a quick reminder of how O'Reilly and Fox News arrived at a common place (a story with a lying guest who is a literal fraud.)  Donald Trump during a recent rally speech followed the misleading lead of another Fox News host's, Tucker Carlson,  misleading news segment. Trump spoke about Sweden Muslim immigrant riots when there was no such civil unrest. 

After Swedish officials and Swedish citizens disavowed any civil unrest we felt compelled to comment via a post

If you did not visit the link, the essence of the post was the following video from an utter fraud.

If you wish to view the full four-plus minute segment with O'Reilly and his producers at that lying best, click here.

On Monday night, the anticipated took place.  O'Reilly on Fox News airtime, again admitting a "fake news" story. As you view the segment notice O'Reilly places a barrier between the psyche of his sycophant viewers and the reality of a "fake news' guest via the use of the world's "left-wing" media.  

A couple of points. What if left-wing media wasn't monitoring Fox News? Yes, of course, the lying guest and Fox producers would have successfully handed yet another "fake news" story to their viewers.  Moreover, the network would have successfully fulfilled its role as a broadcast division of GOP and conservative international communication.

Image result for toilet news fox news

Trump is no longer a lying presidential candidate; he is a lying US President.  

While somewhat unnecessary, we thought we'd end this piece with a couple of fact checks regarding Trump's Sweden unrest. 

Donald Trump in Florida laments 'what's happening last night - PolitiFact

Politifact O'Reilly Pundit File

What would a piece about Fox News read like without mention of its newest propagandist: Tucker Carlson? Arguing with Bill Nye is fruitless when the topic relates to climate change.


Monday, February 17, 2014

NBC Shows Inexperience in Climate Change Discussion; Meet The Press Flops!

Image:  NBC News
In mid-January Huffington Post published a piece about the lack of media coverage of "Climate Change." While some networks will not acknowledge the possible impact of carbon emission on the Earth's environment.  Whenever "Climate Change" is a true scientific phenomenon resultant from human waste or not is a major issue that has been placed in the same divergent baskets and taxing the rich or affirmative action. Thus, the issue will never have common ground from which US politicians will apply bi-partisan corrective actions. 

The following Media Matters data focuses on the "big three" television networks and the "Climate Change" denier network" Fox News. Since, both Pew Research and Gallup surveys yielded data indicating people get their news from televisions, the lack of coverage of what appear as changing climate condition is dangerous.  That mean networks owners (who are predominately conservative people), news producers, managers and editors have full control over information to half of US voters. A position of power that ultimately leaves us with this: "What we do not know will hurt us."  

Media Matters via Huffington Post

While one network completely ignores reporting on the prospect of climate change, all appear in some degree to cover the phenomenon when other news is less prevalent. The 2010 chart indicator in the first chart above could indicate coverage of US politics with little to no coverage of the Earth's climate. Chart bars for 2009 when compared to 2010 bars indicate a coverage abyss comparable to stepping into a 5,000 feet deep glacier crevasse. The charts also indicate climate coverage return from 2010 is as fleeting as one's ability to climb out of the 5,000 foot crevasse.

Now, let's move forward to the post Sunday and NBC's Meet The Press venture into climate change.   

When I read that Bill Nye would sit with David Gregory and Marsha Blackburn (R) TN. to discuss Climate change, a cloud of suspicion set-in. Why would NBC politicize the issue with a well known environmental expert and a GOP mouth-piece with no background in climate science.  After, accepting that Meet The Press is a political platform for the the Right, my wonderment moved to choice of guest. Since, I have suggested my thoughts on Blackburn as a viable guest, I will not "beat that horse" any farther. I will leave Blackburn as guest on this note: there isn't a television opportunity Blackburn will not opt to leverage.   

The following exhibition is exactly how a network should not cover climate change.  And, a deeper point is what you are about to see is exactly why a major network like NBC, should much more carefully booked 'point-counterpoint' guests. Surely, there was another from the GOP who could have spoken a bit more credibly about conservative views on climate change. maybe Blackburn's political position in the US House qualified as well as any int he GOP. In 13 plus minutes Blackburn performed true-to-form at spewing talking-points without regard for empirical and substantive data available view a quick Google search. 

Mother Jones on Nye Vs. Blackburn...
Bill Nye is getting good at this. 
Fresh off a mega-debate that embarrassed Young Earth creationists and led to none other than Pat Robertson denouncing their views, Nye appeared on Meet the Press today  to debate Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), a global warming "skeptic." 
On the air, Blackburn, who is vice-chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, denied that there is a scientific consensus on climate change and argued that "you don't make good laws, sustainable laws, when you're making them on hypotheses, or theories, or unproven sciences." (There is indeed such a scientific consensus ; at one moment, host David Gregory had to correct Blackburn on this point.)
A sample of my point. Blackburn fires up the "machine-gun" like rhetoric with nothing more than a choice opinions.

Full discussion (13:35 minutes)