Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga: a Book Review

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:46 PM GMT on November 21, 2012

Share this Blog
40
+

With a name like "Language Intelligence: Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga", a book with a title like that compels one to pick it up and see what the heck the author is talking about. And Joe Romm's new book on how to communicate doesn't disappoint--it's a thoughtful and compelling look at the techniques used by some of history's great communicators to help persuade. Joe Romm is author of the climateprogress.org blog, the most visited climate change blog on the Internet, and the main blog that I use to stay current on climate change and energy news. Romm defines Language Intelligence as "the ability to convince people of something both intellectually and emotionally, at both a conscious and unconscious level." He goes on to say, "If facts were sufficient to persuade people, then experts in science would rule the world. But facts are not, and scientists do not. We filter out all the facts that do not match our views." At the heart of great communication lies great story telling, and Romm give us these tips on how to tell a story people will want to read:

- Write a great headline: Newspaper readers read 56% of the headlines, but only 13% of the stories are at least half-read. Headlines are even more important on-line, since they are what show up on Google searches and tweets. An example of one the most re-tweeted headlines Romm used in 2011: "Mother Nature is Just Getting Warmed Up: June 2011 Heat Records Crushing Cold Records by 13 to 1" (Romm uses a pun and personification to help create an eye-catching headline.)

- Short words are the best words.

- Slogans sell.

- If you don't repeat, you can't compete. Repetition and rhyming help people remember your message.

- The golden rule of speech-making is: "Tell 'em what you're going to tell 'em; tell 'em; then tell 'em what you told 'em."

- Repeated distortions and smears are as effective as repeated truths, so beware of these sorts of attacks.

- If you want to de-bunk a myth, you need to focus on stating the truth, not repeating the myth.

- If you want to be more noticed and remembered, use more figures of speech (metaphors.) Examples of metaphors I've used include comparing our melting Arctic to the attic of a house that is on fire (Earth's attic is on fire: Arctic sea ice bottoms out at a new record low) and comparing the impact of global warming on extreme weather to the impact steroids have on a baseball slugger (Extreme events of 2011: climate change a major factor in some, but not all).

- Create an extended metaphor when you have a big task at hand. Countless books and articles underscore that extended metaphors are at the core of human thinking.



Video 1. National Center for Atmospheric Research scientist Dr. Jerry Meehl uses a metaphor to explain how climate change's impact on extreme weather is similar to how steroids affect a baseball slugger's ability to hit a ball out of the park.

At 183 pages, the book only took me about two hours to read, and I was very glad I did. It was very entertaining and informative, and anyone involved in public communication can learn from this book. I give it my highest rating: four stars out of four. Language Intelligence: Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga is $9.67 from Amazon.com.

Have a great Thanksgiving Holiday, everyone, and I'll have a new post for you on Friday.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 112 - 62

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11Blog Index

Quoting sar2401:
This is the actual quote from John Lennon, as reported in the London Evening Standard on March 4, 1966:
"Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn't argue about that; I'm right and I'll be proved right. We're more popular than Jesus now; I don't know which will go first%u2014rock 'n' roll or Christianity. Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me."

The "more popular than Jesus" thing was a small part of what got Christians upset. John Lennon, while a great musician, was clearly off base when it came to discussing Christianity.
I see your point, but are you implying that nothing is more popular that Christianity? If you are, you would be off base.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Per comment #99 (I don't quote trolls)...
You didn't learn from that ban did you?

!, -, gone. :P
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
110. yoboi
Quoting sar2401:

Oh come, now, Nea, you are seriously trying to tell me the poll conducted by Fairleigh Dickinson University, focusing only on people in New Jersey, and then only on two news issues, is 1) scientific, and 2) proves that Fox viewers in general are consistently less informed about people who, say, live in a cave? Without knowing what controls were used in the study and how randomness was determined, I would be hard pressed to use this as evidence of anything more than a typical public opinion poll. I suspect that a poll of New Jersey residents before Sandy would have shown that people who watched Fox News also knew significantly less about hurricanes than residents of Florida who did watch Fox News.

I don't understand this constant need from those on the left to vilify Fox News. All media outlets lie or slant stories to one degree or another. I haven't found the actual "News" portion of Fox to be any more biased than most news outlets. Commentators are another matter, but they are presented as commentators, not newscasters. Certainly, in terms of news manipulation, MSNBC and ABC have both been guilty of outright lies and manipulation in several recent cases...and this was their news department, not from a commentator. Other news outlets, including Fox, did a valuable service by reporting these lies and manipulations. Fox should be called out any time they make factual error, manipulations, or outright lies when reporting news, but those on either side of the political spectrum should be equally diligent in finding the same behavior in all news outlets.

Edit: BTW, your second link, that Fox News actually makes you stupid, was based on exactly the same university study as in the first link. Rolling Stone's headline doesn't say it makes you stupid - those were your words - it's says it makes you less informed. Why would you want to to change a reasonable headline into something so inflammatory?



good luck getting an answer...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
109. yoboi
Quoting wxgeek723:
You know, I STRIVE to be open minded.
But every day I come on WU I see comments that reinforce Southern stereotypes.
Just saying.




guess your not from the south??
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
108. yoboi
Quoting VR46L:


Guess better say no more on it ...

Anyways

there's a bit of an interesting blob heading into E Pac




it's cool i thought it was kinda funny.....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
"It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile.Be yourself no matter what they say".
Member Since: August 14, 2010 Posts: 10 Comments: 16971
You know, I STRIVE to be open minded.
But every day I come on WU I see comments that reinforce Southern stereotypes.
Just saying.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
105. VR46L
Quoting yoboi:



no i got a 12 hr ban for asking that question....


Guess better say no more on it ...

Anyways

there's a bit of an interesting blob heading into E Pac

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVE TO EVERYONE on the WunderBlog.

I hope mother nature cooperates and gives us all nice Thanksgiving weather.

Member Since: March 10, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 10289
SPC must see something coming. This is 6 days out... DAY 4-8 CONVECTIVE OUTLOOK
NWS STORM PREDICTION CENTER NORMAN OK
0359 AM CST WED NOV 21 2012

VALID 241200Z - 291200Z

...DISCUSSION...
PROGRESSIVE AND GENERALLY HIGH-AMPLITUDE PATTERN ALOFT IS FCST
THROUGH PERIOD. ORGANIZED SVR POTENTIAL WILL DEPEND ON SUBSTANTIAL
MOISTURE RETURN FROM WRN/CENTRAL GULF...WHICH IS NOT PROBABLE UNTIL
AT LEAST LATE DAY-5/25TH-26TH...AND MORE LIKELY DAY-6/26TH-27TH. BY
LATE DAY-5 AND EARLY DAY-6...OPEN-WAVE REMNANTS OF GULF OF AK
CYCLONE SHOULD BE MOVING SEWD OVER NRN/CENTRAL ROCKIES. MAIN
CONCERN NOW APPEARS TO BE MID-LATE DAY-6 OVER PORTIONS E TX AND
ARKLATEX REGION...PERHAPS MANIFEST AS
WELL-ORGANIZED...LOW-CAPE/STG-SHEAR NOCTURNAL EVENT.

SLGT DISAGREEMENT IS EVIDENT ON TIMING/AMPLITUDE OF DAY-6 UPPER WAVE
AND RELATED SFC FRONTAL ZONE AMONG ECMWF/SPECTRAL AND MOST MREF
MEMBERS. HOWEVER...PROGS GENERALLY CONCUR WITH JUXTAPOSITION OF
100+ KT 250-MB JET MAX...FAVORABLY STG DEEP SHEAR...HEIGHT FALLS
ALOFT...INCREASINGLY MOIST WARM SECTOR INTRUDED BY STG COLD
FRONT...AND PREFRONTAL DEW POINTS REACHING 60S F. SUCH SCENARIOS
TYPICALLY YIELD AOA 30% COOL-SEASON/TOTAL-SVR RESULTS. SIMILAR
POTENTIAL MAY CARRY OVER INTO DAY-7/27TH-28TH OVER PORTIONS
MID-SOUTH...TN VALLEY AND/OR CENTRAL GULF COAST STATES.
HOWEVER...PHASE UNCERTAINTIES IN KEY FEATURES -- BOTH SFC AND UPPER
AIR -- ARE LARGE ENOUGH TO PRECLUDE UNCONDITIONAL 30% AREA THEN.

..EDWARDS.. 11/21/2012
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
A) The articles may have been "left-leaning", but the research they cited--and to which they linked--was anything but. B) MSNBC was also treated unkindly by those same studies. Just so you know.

Oh come, now, Nea, you are seriously trying to tell me the poll conducted by Fairleigh Dickinson University, focusing only on people in New Jersey, and then only on two news issues, is 1) scientific, and 2) proves that Fox viewers in general are consistently less informed about people who, say, live in a cave? Without knowing what controls were used in the study and how randomness was determined, I would be hard pressed to use this as evidence of anything more than a typical public opinion poll. I suspect that a poll of New Jersey residents before Sandy would have shown that people who watched Fox News also knew significantly less about hurricanes than residents of Florida who did watch Fox News.

I don't understand this constant need from those on the left to vilify Fox News. All media outlets lie or slant stories to one degree or another. I haven't found the actual "News" portion of Fox to be any more biased than most news outlets. Commentators are another matter, but they are presented as commentators, not newscasters. Certainly, in terms of news manipulation, MSNBC and ABC have both been guilty of outright lies and manipulation in several recent cases...and this was their news department, not from a commentator. Other news outlets, including Fox, did a valuable service by reporting these lies and manipulations. Fox should be called out any time they make factual error, manipulations, or outright lies when reporting news, but those on either side of the political spectrum should be equally diligent in finding the same behavior in all news outlets.

Edit: BTW, your second link, that Fox News actually makes you stupid, was based on exactly the same university study as in the first link. Rolling Stone's headline doesn't say it makes you stupid - those were your words - it's says it makes you less informed. Why would you want to to change a reasonable headline into something so inflammatory?

Second Edit:
Sorry, Nea, it was not you that reported the inflammatory headline, it was Rolling Stone. The Rolling Stone headline completely misrepresented the results of the study, speaking of news manipulation.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
My pleasure:

Poll: Fox News Viewers Less Informed Than Those Who Read No News

Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid

A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.

The Lies That Fox News Viewers Believe (PDF)

...people who...watched Fox News were...more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it

And so on. Please let me know if you need more...Because a well-researched and vigorously-tested scientific theory endorsed nearly unanimously by those whose views on the subject are most and best informed is in no way the same as comparing either ratings among competing cable TV networks or the preferences of America's fickle TV-viewing public.


Lmao. Nea, You are the best.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Another point of view:

Tell all the Truth but tell it slant --
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise

As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind --
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting VR46L:


Did the carbon footprint question ever get answered? ...



no i got a 12 hr ban for asking that question....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting yoboi:



idk he can never answer a simple question unless it's from an msnbc study done by sharpton or matthews...


Did the carbon footprint question ever get answered? ...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
That doesn't seem like very solid logic. It's a little like saying, "Marlboros actually aren't that unhealthy. At least not as unhealthy as the other major cigarette brands. I think if it was built up such a tremendous legacy of causing things like cancer, emphysema, and stroke, not as many smokers would smoke them as they do to get their nicotine fix." The popularity of a thing is not necessarily an indication of how good, or valuable, or trustworthy, or healthy that thing is. Ya know?

Anyway, back into the kitchen. Three more pies in the oven, and, in the meantime, I'm rising two of the three kinds of bread that I'll be crumbling for dressing once they're out of the oven. (Corn- , French-, and sourdough bread, along with sausage, apples, cranberries, a few mushrooms, and pecans. Oh, and butter. Lots and lots of butter. Just this once.)


Can I come to your house Nea? Lol ...actualy doing the same thing here in Houston ...pies and bread for stuffing ...all made with the love of my own little hands
Member Since: April 24, 2010 Posts: 1 Comments: 2518
Just popping in to wish everyone a wonderful Thanksgiving, not sure on my time tomorrow. And for our non-American friends, a wonderful day to you as well. Back to baking pies.

And a wonderful Happy Thanksgiving to our Armed Forces.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting VR46L:


Or maybe oil fired , or coal or even firewood .....



idk he can never answer a simple question unless it's from an msnbc study done by sharpton or matthews...
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TomballTXPride:


Going by that logic, why do you always mention the 97% number when referring to climatologists if popularity doesn't matter?


If 97% of blacksmiths say "Don't stand near the forge when I'm shoveling coal in," you stay away. And then you wonder what the hell kind of deal the remaining three percent of blacksmiths have with the undertaker.

Expertise matters. Argumentam ad populum is a fallacy. Arguing on the basis of independently-reproducible data that literally anyone can reconstruct given sufficient expertise is not. The 97% is a signal to those who refuse to educate themselves on the matter, not an argument in and of itself.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Great, a blog post about how to slant the truth from Dr. M. That's how MSNBC came to be ... by imitating Fox. Let's all jump in the gutter!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
This is the actual quote from John Lennon, as reported in the London Evening Standard on March 4, 1966:
"Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn't argue about that; I'm right and I'll be proved right. We're more popular than Jesus now; I don't know which will go first—rock 'n' roll or Christianity. Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me."

The "more popular than Jesus" thing was a small part of what got Christians upset. John Lennon, while a great musician, was clearly off base when it came to discussing Christianity.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jedkins01:



While I don't uphold Fox News, as it is clearly biased, why do you single it out amongst the other major networks which are somehow even worse at times? Why is that? What is your goal?
Jed, it is not I who is "singling out" Fox. There have been a number of university-level studies that have done the "singling out" for me; I'm merely citing those studies. At any rate, Fox was the subject of the original comment to which I was responding (#45), so discussing it seemed like the right thing to do.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13529
Quoting yoboi:


are you using a solar oven?? gas or electric??


Or maybe oil fired , or coal or even firewood .....
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting sar2401:


Now Nea, just after I wrote I liked you, you come up with this. :) All the sources you quoted are at least left-leaning, and one is from MSNBC!
A) The articles may have been "left-leaning", but the research they cited--and to which they linked--was anything but. B) MSNBC was also treated unkindly by those same studies. Just so you know.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13529
FOX's hard news programming is exactly that. Hard news. Their opinion programming is exactly that as well. If you don't watch FOX you miss a lot of stories that the other networks won't report or downplay if it doesn't show the libs in a good light.
For instance, The dems, during their convention, having to railroad their own delegates to put God back into their official platform after having taken him (or her) out.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
My pleasure:

Poll: Fox News Viewers Less Informed Than Those Who Read No News

Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid

A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.

The Lies That Fox News Viewers Believe (PDF)

...people who...watched Fox News were...more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it

And so on. Please let me know if you need more.


Now Nea, just after I wrote I liked you, you come up with this. :) All the sources you quoted are at least left-leaning, and one is from MSNBC! I'm pretty sure MSNBC is never going to have a favorable word to say about Fox, considering that Fox is cleaning their clock when it comes to ratings. I could provide you with just as many links from right-leaning web sites that purport to show that the major networks and NPR are run by a bunch of commies, and they would be just as misleading.

Fox certainly has its own biases, as do all media outlets. What concerns me is that some people assume the average American is just a sponge, absorbing whatever is thrown at them. I don't know what the percentage is, but most people are capable of dissecting information and discarding the obviously false while doing more research on what might be true. Media outlets from both ends of the political spectrum present valuable information, and it's up to each of us to decide what we believe. I may be naive, but I seem to have more faith than some that most people are really not stupid, and will come to mostly reasonable conclusions. One could certainly argue that a huge amount of time and money was spent to defeat President Obama, yet a majority of people believed what they were being told was wrong and voted him in again. I don't happen to be one of them, but I respect the fact that people really can swim upstream and don't need to be led by people that believe they know "best".
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting bappit:

I think he marveled at the craziness of the world since it seemed like the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. Oh help us! At least they just burned records for that remark.


well all the kids went out and bought new albums after their folks went bonkers and burned... so the Beat-uls made out anyway..

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
That doesn't seem like very solid logic. It's a little like saying, "Marlboros actually aren't that unhealthy. At least not as unhealthy as the other major cigarette brands. I think if it was built up such a tremendous legacy of causing things like cancer, emphysema, and stroke, not as many smokers would smoke them as they do to get their nicotine fix." The popularity of a thing is not necessarily an indication of how good, or valuable, or trustworthy, or healthy that thing is. Ya know?

Anyway, back into the kitchen. Three more pies in the oven, and, in the meantime, I'm rising two of the three kinds of bread that I'll be crumbling for dressing once they're out of the oven. (Corn- , French-, and sourdough bread, along with sausage, apples, cranberries, a few mushrooms, and pecans. Oh, and butter. Lots and lots of butter. Just this once.)


are you using a solar oven?? gas or electric??
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting bappit:

You felt compelled to even comment on that?


and your objection is?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
I do not recall Lennon comparing himself to Jesus. He was a proponent for peace. I guess Jesus and Lennon had the same idea

I think he marveled at the craziness of the world since it seemed like the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. Oh help us! At least they just burned records for that remark.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TomballTXPride:

I asked that about 18 blogs back, and I'm still waiting for that answer too.



lol ;)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

An Extract from:-

16. eyeofbetsy


"China is building a new mega watt of coal fired electricity generation a week. Already they produce nearly twice the co2 America does."
Quoted!

You do need to add into this, that there are 4 times as many Chinese people as there are in the USA, so from that ratio, the Chinese are only producing half the CO2 per person that the USA is.

Having said that the amount of CO2 pollution going on is so vast that even if the Chinese stopped producing CO2 altogether then it would probably make very little difference to the grand scheme of things in the greenhouse gases movie.
The next big addition to the problem is going to be more and more industrialisation of the third world where laws and rules are not going to take much of a priority.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AztecCe:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Mayans not incorperate daylight savings, the extra .256363004 day or leap years into their calender? If this is true then isn't the actual date they predicted already behind us or in the future? I don't think the Mayan ancient caldender and the roman calender are in sync...



The Mayan calendar was based on an event, not a date. The Mayans predicted (correctly) a lunar eclipse in December 2012, went back in records to see when that particular eclipse happened before, and determined these two occurrences as the beginning and end of a b'ak'tun. They then split the time up between the two. Thus, they did not use a Gregorian date to determined the end of an age.

However, they also predicted events after the coming end of the age, and did not teach or believe that the world would end in December 2012. IOW, you still have to shop for Christmas :)


Nea, when can I expect delivery of a Malibu rum pie?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting eyeofbetsy:

How do I know that any of that is true?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting NEwxguy:
What a title for a book to grab your attention.
Putting Lady Gaga in with Jesus,Lincoln and Shakespeare

A bit over the top for me.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Jedkins01:



I really find it hard to believe anyone takes that seriously, civilizations controlling galaxies, the Universe, or even multiple Universes? Really? I mean, I can understand the type 1 argument, but beyond that, its more science fiction that star wars or star trek ever was... Human beings are loony creatures. We often think we are more intelligent than we are, and when we are intelligent it sometimes seems too much for the individual to handle sanely...

You felt compelled to even comment on that?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SherwoodSpirit:


Ugh. I quoted myself. It makes me twitch because it feels narcissistic to me. ;)
Oh well, easier to connect my continued thought.

What prompted his oft-misquoted statement was that in that year (1965? 66?, I've forgotten which), snip

Actually, it was 1967 (early fall, I believe) just before the release of "Hello, Goodbye". That single was the first new release to be banned by radio stations after John made his comments regarding The Beatles being bigger than Christ. He later walked it back, noting he was just observing that fans elevated The Beatles higher, it seemed, than Christ.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
I don't recall FOX editing a 911 call to omit a question so the answer sounded racist.. hasn't MSNBC been caught at that twice.. editing out something to change the "tone" Didn't MSNBC use their poster child Sharpton to fan the class war in commercial after commercial.

There are more than just FOX being disingenuous.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting SherwoodSpirit:


Actually he was expressing his bafflement that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. He was amazed by fanaticism of Beatles fandom. He was not being self-aggrandizing, although many Christians (in their own form of fanatacism) chose to misunderstand and misquote him at the time and now this myth has been carried on in perpetuity. I remember the public book/record burnings back then and I still shake my head at the stupidity.


Ugh. I quoted myself. It makes me twitch because it feels narcissistic to me. ;)
Oh well, easier to connect my continued thought.

What prompted his oft-misquoted statement was that in that year (1965? 66?, I've forgotten which), Beatles albums outsold the bible. If I recall correctly, a reporter brought that up in an interview and Lennon expressed surprise that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus.

And then the madness ensued.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TomballTXPride:


Going by that logic, why do you always mention the 97% number when referring to climatologists if popularity doesn't matter?


Because that is not a popularity contest. AGW theory is based on solid science and evidence. Almost all climatologists agree with the science, and they are all experts in the field to understand the science.

The average person is not an expert in every area they may have an opinion on, nor do they always act in their best interest. For example, McDonald's food is quite popular but that certainly doesn't mean it's healthy. :)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Boy, it's tough in here when there are no major disasters to talk about. :)

It's a beautiful day here in Central Alabama, with a temperature of 69 and a light breeze as I write this. It's supposedly only going to get into the mid 50's and down into the mid 20's by Saturday. Seems to hard to believe, but we'll see if it really happens. No severe storms at all so far, which is a blessing for us, since November is our secondary severe weather season here.

Since we're all going to die soon from the curse of the Mayans, AGW, zombie attack, asteroid collision, or just plain old age, tomorrow will be a good day for giving thanks for all I've gotten so far and the pleasures of life while they last. I've met an a lot of really good people here (even including Nea {gasp!}), so I'm also thankful for all of you, Dr. Masters, and Angela for giving us a place to vent, learn, and generaly hang out. Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Neapolitan:
That doesn't seem like very solid logic. It's a little like saying, "Marlboros actually aren't that unhealthy. At least not as unhealthy as the other major cigarette brands. I think if it was built up such a tremendous legacy of causing things like cancer, emphysema, and stroke, not as many smokers would smoke them as they do to get their nicotine fix." The popularity of a thing is not necessarily an indication of how good, or valuable, or trustworthy, or healthy that thing is. Ya know?

Anyway, back into the kitchen. Three more pies in the oven, and, in the meantime, I'm rising two of the three kinds of bread that I'll be crumbling for dressing once they're out of the oven. (Corn- , French-, and sourdough bread, along with sausage, apples, cranberries, a few mushrooms, and pecans. Oh, and butter. Lots and lots of butter. Just this once.)



While I don't uphold Fox News, as it is clearly biased, why do you single it out amongst the other major networks which are somehow even worse at times? Why is that? What is your goal?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting hydrus:
I do not recall Lennon comparing himself to Jesus. He was a proponent for peace. I guess Jesus and Lennon had the same idea

There was some point about 40+ years ago when some of the Beatles were reported to say we are more popular than Christ.
This as far as I can remember was followed by a large quantity of their records and writings being burned in the USA.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TomballTXPride:
I have yet to see anything scientific or such evidence even remotely close to convincing that Fox News knowingly spreads lies and false information to their millions of daily viewers. When you find that data, please do share, as I would be eagerly waiting to see it.
My pleasure:

Poll: Fox News Viewers Less Informed Than Those Who Read No News

Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid

A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.

The Lies That Fox News Viewers Believe (PDF)

...people who...watched Fox News were...more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it

And so on. Please let me know if you need more...
Quoting TomballTXPride:


Going by that logic, why do you always mention the 97% number when referring to climatologists if popularity doesn't matter?
Because a well-researched and vigorously-tested scientific theory endorsed nearly unanimously by those whose views on the subject are most and best informed is in no way the same as comparing either ratings among competing cable TV networks or the preferences of America's fickle TV-viewing public.
Member Since: November 8, 2009 Posts: 4 Comments: 13529
Quoting stratcat:
...utter nonsense removed...


I half expected you to burn a witch by the end of that diatribe. The Dark Ages called. They want their mentality back.

That's not to say you are ignorant. You are definitely not ignorant. An ignorant person can be educated. An ignorant person can actively pursue a course to make themselves more educated. They can go and discover information and facts about what they don't know. And in the end, an ignorant person will no longer be ignorant.

No, you are maliciously willfully ignorant. You and others like you REFUSE to be educated about that which you do not understand, often to the detriment of others. There is no amount of scientific research, or facts, or even reality itself that will convince you otherwise. Your ideology trumps all, facts be damned. It doesn't matter how many experts on the subject agree, you always know better and you are always right. Cognitive dissonance is your bread and butter, and so is insulting every single person who disagrees with you no matter if it's your neighbor or Albert Einstein.

It doesn't matter that a grade school experiment can demonstrate the physics behind the greenhouse effect. It doesn't matter the thousands of scientists over the past 150 years have written reams upon reams of peer reviewed science papers on the subject. It doesn't matter that there are petabytes of observational data backing up researchers claims. It doesn't matter that the same atomic principles that cause the greenhouse effect are also used in everyday manufacturing and other processes. To the willfully ignorant, this is nothing but pointless noise, easily dismissed (or twisted) with a wave of the hand as you are doing.

It's people like you that fought against asbestos being banned. It's people like you that fought against the fact that cigarettes cause cancer. It was people like you that fought against putting scrubbers on smoke stacks to reduce acid rain. It was people like you that fought against banning CFC's which depleted the ozone layer.

And by the end of this century when the world is dealing with more serious consequences of AGW, it will be people like you screaming "Why didn't anyone warn us?!?!?" and looking for anyone but yourself to blame.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MAweatherboy1:
Latest CPC maps indicate cold air dominating much of the country in the 6-10 day range:



Warm air begins to take over from west to east in the 8-14 day range, however:

Yes!.
Member Since: August 14, 2010 Posts: 10 Comments: 16971
Quoting plutorising:


nea is a renaissance person.
lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Latest CPC maps indicate cold air dominating much of the country in the 6-10 day range:



Warm air begins to take over from west to east in the 8-14 day range, however:

Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 83 Comments: 7779
Quoting eyeofbetsy:


Would like to put a piece of that ice cream pie on top of my mississippi mud.
I was thinking about posting the recipe.....I just cant do it..lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 112 - 62

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.