| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
To be fair, I think it's virtually impossible for people to have a completely open mind on any subject because they are always drawn to anything which backs the viewpoint they instinctively edge towards. That said, Gluey's behaviour in this thread hardly seems like that of someone who is open to being persuaded after studying multiple sources on a subject. To dismiss the link you posted out of hand because it comes from a "global, multi-platform media and entertainment company" while placing so much faith in a story from something that is a global, multi-platform media and entertainment company with a clear political bias does strike me as a bit odd.Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
Instinctively, I believe in global warming, but have gone on to fact checking sites to try and get something that, hopefully, looks at the subject from a fairly neutral perspective - I'll make no comment on what is said in these links;-
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/11/the...limate-change/
http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/til...limate-change/
http://www.politifact.com/subjects/climate-change/
I was just pointing out a current news item, or is that not allowed these days? Whistleblowers tend to have more to lose, so it's debatable whether somebody would end their professional career by making thing things up. I only mentioned the "entertainment company" bit as it's code for "we also promote propanda", while the DM fall under the authority of the Independent Press Standards Organisation.
Last edited by Wales-Bales; 08-02-17 at 07:35.
What does the whistle blowers background look like?
Dr John Bates is a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation according to the DM.
So you are 100% sure there was no outside influence, deals or coercion involved?
There could have been. If you suspect anything and you feel strongly about it, now would be a good time to bring it up with the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Unless of course, as usual you are just acting like a tit
Ad hominem attacks do you no favours.There could have been. If you suspect anything and you feel strongly about it, now would be a good time to bring it up with the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Unless of course, as usual you are just acting like a tit
It's a little strange though, Gluey, you must admit. When an experienced US judge made an order against Trump, and very clearly showed his working to anyone who wanted to look, you were falling over yourself to cast doubt against his integrity with subtle questions.
And yet when a man (who I'm very sure you had never heard of) says there's been a coverup but provides no evidence, you're happy to accept it without asking the same questions; presumably because you like what he says.
Why is he speaking before releasing his paper? Is it because he knows it will get ripped apart straightaway so he wants to get his publicity in first?
Finally, you're obviously proud enough of your IPSO comeback to use it twice, but all the Mail have done is print an interview with him so there would be nothing for them to investigage. I'm sure you know that though
Any chance of an answer to this?
No need to look into the judge, others are already doing that. I have no doubt it was a political issue though, as is the climate change one above.Ad hominem attacks do you no favours.
It's a little strange though, Gluey, you must admit. When an experienced US judge made an order against Trump, and very clearly showed his working to anyone who wanted to look, you were falling over yourself to cast doubt against his integrity with subtle questions.
And yet when a man (who I'm very sure you had never heard of) says there's been a coverup but provides no evidence, you're happy to accept it without asking the same questions; presumably because you like what he says.
Why is he speaking before releasing his paper? Is it because he knows it will get ripped apart straightaway so he wants to get his publicity in first?
Finally, you're obviously proud enough of your IPSO comeback to use it twice, but all the Mail have done is print an interview with him so there would be nothing for them to investigage. I'm sure you know that though
Here you go Inspector Lardy
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Dr+John+Bates
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Dr+John+Bates
Dig in
Gluey, the guy who claims he is an independent thinker who shuns the mainstream media investigates multiple sources from both sides before making his own decision and he's here wetting his pants over a Daily Mail article with no evidence and a single interviewee.
Couldn't make it up
Have you seen this? https://vimeo.com/153178203
Nope, and I'm not likely to have time to today either.
What is his case?
Let's see what happens, ehGluey, the guy who claims he is an independent thinker who shuns the mainstream media investigates multiple sources from both sides before making his own decision and he's here wetting his pants over a Daily Mail article with no evidence and a single interviewee.
Couldn't make it up
It's too late, we've already seen you spaffing over the Daily MailLet's see what happens, eh
Like I said, only the DM will print this stuff, the rest of the MSM stay away from itIt's too late, we've already seen you spaffing over the Daily Mail
That wouldn't surprise me given that Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, are all in the Globalists corner. The war on fake news continues
And the Daily Mail is such a paragon of virtue eh? 😃😃😃That wouldn't surprise me given that Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, are all in the Globalists corner. The war on fake news continues
They report anti-globalist news items, which one would expect from a Brexit supporting media organisation. Cameron was so incensed by the DM that he demanded the firing of their editor. Anybody not on the same page as the Globalists is being silenced under the fake news agenda.
This is Wikipedia though.That wouldn't surprise me given that Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, are all in the Globalists corner. The war on fake news continues
Information is a very powerful tool. Any group trying to achieve a specific agenda would certainly like to 'add a little colour', no matter how subtle the effect is. Blocking the DM as a source seems to be a good example of this.
I'm not sure if you are using that tripe to convince us or you.That wouldn't surprise me given that Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, are all in the Globalists corner. The war on fake news continues
Does it?
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...l-antivaccine/
Have you seen this?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote