Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Monday, February 25. 2019

His best podcast ever?


Scott Adams wonders how often we have been snookered by the media. He thinks it might be his best podcast ever. 


Is the MSM the real enemy of the country? Is the press trying to make us fight each other?  (BTW, Scott is a lefty, claims he is left of Bernie.) 


Episode 429 Scott Adams: A Possible Path Out of TDS Forming in the Zeitgeist, Catholic Church, Climate Debate

Posted by The News Junkie in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 12:31 | Comments (13) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Scott Adams is garbage.
#1 Rusty on 2019-02-25 13:06 (Reply)
Smarter and more thoughtful than anybody on tv
#1.1 BD on 2019-02-25 14:10 (Reply)
'Smarter and more thoughtful than anybody on tv'. Boy, talk about a low bar (and pretty much anybody on tv knows about those). I think Adams' trained-hypno-uber-persuader' shtick depends upon keeping it difficult to characterize him, personally. I don't believe he's a super-lefty though. I confess I don't get very much from his podcasts, his content has some good basic ideas but too many filler-seconds.
#1.1.1 Aggie on 2019-02-25 19:05 (Reply)
The thing I don't like about podcasts is you have no control. They may have a decent 2 minute talk but take 15 minutes to give it. The stumble through it, get distracted, talk about themselves and their family, and on and on. I just don't listen to podcasts. If it is text I can read it faster than they can speak it and I can skip over the useless stuff. If it is a video and it is wordy I can look ahead and skip to where it picks up again, But with a podcast you are at their mercy.
#1.1.1.1 Anon on 2019-02-25 22:35 (Reply)
The MSM is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party. They're not THE enemy, but part of it.
#2 Sam L. on 2019-02-25 14:01 (Reply)
When Scott started hacking up a lung a few minutes in I swear I felt some of it flick onto my face.
#3 Talnik on 2019-02-25 14:29 (Reply)
QUOTE:
{paraphrase} NOAA does not say we're already seeing sea level rise, and that it can be attributed to human emissions of carbon dioxide.

That is not accurate. NOAA does say that we can observe sea level rise, and that it can be attributed to human emissions.

NOAA: "As global temperatures continue to warm, sea level will continue to rise. How much it will rise depends mostly on the rate of future carbon dioxide emissions and future global warming. How fast it will rise depends mostly on the rate of glacier and ice sheet melting."

Furthermore, the rate of sea level rise is accelerating. See Nerem et al., Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era, PNAS 2018.
#4 Zachriel on 2019-02-25 16:14 (Reply)
That is incorrect. There isn't sufficient data to conclude sea level rise is accelerating or if it's related to AGW (or if AGW is even a proved phenomenon).

In fact, based on effective N, there are serious statistical issues with the data you're misusing to support AG Warmenism. (Proper analysis et al 2019) Or is it scientifically rigorous to eternally parse data and jam it into pigeonholes, expecting bias confirmation?

Notably, you'll not directly answer that question despite these issues. Sure.
#4.1 Clownbotting all the way down. on 2019-02-26 07:23 (Reply)
Japan is leading the way in terms of carbon dioxide emissions from human beings, since they are not having enough babies to replace the country's death rate. Thus, every year, there are less Japanese around, and they are very strict on immigration. Right now their legislature is debating changes to the immigration law to allow people to work there for longer periods and bring their families; this is facing stiff opposition from various groups. You see more use of robots in Japan than anywhere else, to replace people.
#5 Smart Feller on 2019-02-25 17:12 (Reply)
Scott Adams's value is being the only widely heard commentator who takes the media as an entertainment choice, anxious to sell eyeballs to advertisers.

All the other commentators never figure that out and talk about misrepresentation of issues and so forth, when the media isn't interested in issues, just eyeballs. They further the meme that the media is a serious news source, or ought to be.

There's no market for hard news. It's an entertainment choice or it goes backrupt.
#6 rhhardin (Link) on 2019-02-25 19:00 (Reply)
I'd be more inclined to characterise it as "irritainment" rather than "entertainment," but I take your point.
#6.1 Phil, Jr. on 2019-02-26 08:11 (Reply)
Adams is being more thoughtful than most partisans on this controversy, but he seems desperate to find a moral equivalency between both sides of the debate. And yet one of the critical errors he attributes to the anti-warmist expert he's chosen to rely on as a representative of that whole side of the debate is just the possibly unfounded theory that warmists are unduly motivated by a natural fear of disasters.

Adams then admits several times that he thinks this really is an accurate description of most people's mindset. Yet somehow arguing that warmists are motivated by this highly plausible mindset is so logically faulty that the anti-warmist expert's credibility on all other issues is fatally damaged. A weird way to analyze things. This is what comes of focuses on subjective credibility of persuasive technique instead of the validity of the logic and arguments.
#7 Texan99 on 2019-02-26 00:11 (Reply)
He does have an obsession with his appearance of fairness that makes him less objective or less credible when he hangs his hat on something like what you are describing. There's a lack of discernment with respect to the main point (apple and orange mixing) or weighting of things (like in this case where the "fault" is completely irrelevant to a technical discussion). If I saw that editorializing I'd completely ignore it as irrelevant and stick with the data, data treatment and data driven conclusions. But then if you are reading a blog vs a technical paper naturally there will be some editorializing to ignore. Also doesn't seem to understand cherry picking or data treatment. Cherry picking is having access to excellent data of high integrity and only picking the part of that data set that supports your theory while blatantly ignoring the part that clearly does not support it. Cherry picking is not picking the best data set we have as a reasonable proxy - say North America land based data or high atmosphere data - and expecting that in a holistic mixing bubble even the "least sensitive" part of that holistic mixing bubble will eventually show the effect unequivocally and measurably if the trend is real and strong enough. If it isn't strong enough to measure should we be at all worried? Can we even say the trend is real? That said the last few scopes he was measurably less of a technical goober and showed a persistence, attention to detail and demand for precision that has rehabilitated my view to : shows some technical potential with enough motivation, great effort and focus. Will he be able to sustain that level of thinking?
#7.1 Karen on 2019-02-26 07:11 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.