Cosmos

[_Gunnar]

Who has been watching the new Cosmos series with Niel deGrasse Tyson being aired on both Fox Network and the National Geographic Network? I highly recommend it! I like it even better than the original Cosmos series with Carl Sagan!

I just finished watching episode 12 of the current series in which Tyson presented an extremely strong case for the reality of AGW. He also very convincingly confirmed what I have been saying about that there really being no significant downside to improving energy efficiency and weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels by developing and converting to reliance on renewable energy sources--even if AGW really is a bogus concern (unless your livelihood is mostly derived directly or indirectly from the world's current dependence on fossil fuels). So why this stubborn, stupid resistance of so many to the very idea of minimizing or eliminating that dependence on fossil fuels?

Neil deGrasse Tyson, NASA and climate scientists like Richard Alley, James Hanson, Katherine Hayhoe and others have far more credibility on this issue than the likes of Fred Singer and Roy Spencer who are sponsored by and derive much of their income from the very companies who have a vested interest in continuing the world's current dependence on fossil fuels--and almost infinitely more credibility than subgenius, ldsfaqs, bcspace and scientifically ignorant conservative talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

A very intriguing fact about this series is that Fox is one of main developers, promoters and broadcasters of it. Does this mean that even the Fox network is now coming around to accepting the reality of AGW? Perhaps there is hope for humanity after all!

[_subgenius]

the FOX network has a proven and undeniable track record of producing/airing television shows that generate profit...pure and simple. The Simpsons has long proven that no other ideology exists at that Broadcast Network.

So, the idea that FOX accepts or denies any "reality" other than the bottom line is quite naïve and revealing for the purveyor if that idea.

AGW programming sells advertising, that is what FOX has come around to.

[_MeDotOrg]

the FOX network has a proven and undeniable track record of producing/airing television shows that generate profit...pure and simple. The Simpsons has long proven that no other ideology exists at that Broadcast Network.

So, the idea that FOX accepts or denies any "reality" other than the bottom line is quite naïve and revealing for the purveyor if that idea.

AGW programming sells advertising, that is what FOX has come around to.

That would go a long way in explaining the 'fair and balanced' viewpoint of its news division.

[_Some Schmo]

It's an awesome show and the AGW episode was particularly good (not to mention particularly scary). I also loved the episodes on evolution and molecules.

The other night, John Stewart had a clip of a dude on Fox News stating that climate change was in fact real (the only Fox News I ever see these days is on The Daily Show). So yeah... looks like they are coming around. I suppose they figured they should broadcast that before the waters rose high enough to flood their studio.

But yeah, watching that episode on AGW, I was once again struck with the incredible selfishness of the people profiting from the slow death of our atmosphere.

[Guest]

the FOX network has a proven and undeniable track record of producing/airing television shows that generate profit...pure and simple. The Simpsons has long proven that no other ideology exists at that Broadcast Network.

So, the idea that FOX accepts or denies any "reality" other than the bottom line is quite naïve and revealing for the purveyor if that idea.

AGW programming sells advertising, that is what FOX has come around to.

You know, as cynical as that post was, it may be one of the most intelligent things I have ever read by you. I suspect that there may very well be a very significant kernel of truth in what you just said about the Fox Network. That doesn't make AGW any less real, however, nor does it stop me from being a fan of The Simpsons and Futurama. Much of the satire in both those programs cogently (and humorously) exposes and illuminates prevalent hypocrisies and absurdities in our current culture and society.

[_Gunnar]

It's an awesome show and the AGW episode was particularly good (not to mention particularly scary). I also loved the episodes on evolution and molecules.

I too!

The other night, John Stewart had a clip of a dude on Fox News stating that climate change was in fact real (the only Fox News I ever see these days is on The Daily Show). So yeah... looks like they are coming around. I suppose they figured they should broadcast that before the waters rose high enough to flood their studio.

But yeah, watching that episode on AGW, I was once again struck with the incredible selfishness of the people profiting from the slow death of our atmosphere.

My feelings exactly!

[_canpakes]

the FOX network has a proven and undeniable track record of producing/airing television shows that generate profit...pure and simple. The Simpsons has long proven that no other ideology exists at that Broadcast Network.

So, the idea that FOX accepts or denies any "reality" other than the bottom line is quite naïve and revealing for the purveyor if that idea.

AGW programming sells advertising, that is what FOX has come around to.

You know, as cynical as that post was, it may be one of the most intelligent things I have ever read by you. I suspect that there may very well be a very significant kernel of truth in what you just said about the Fox Network.

Subgenius hits the nail on the head with this one.

In the case of AGW, the 'bottom line' for Fox - at least in getting folks to pay attention to their infotainment ('news') offerings - usually consists in getting a target audience of older, white, middle class (and then some!) fellows worked up enough into a lather about having to possibly pay an extra 3 cents in taxes on financing a future climate change solution that they'll slavishly devote hours of their day glued to their sets engaged in fits of faux rage. That sort of captive audience keeps the advertisers happy, and the dollars flowing in.

[_ajax18]

worked up enough into a lather about having to possibly pay an extra 3 cents in taxes on financing a future climate change solution

Everything is an extra 3 cents. How many special interest lobbyists are out there making that argument?

Let's look at 1 cent through the paradigm of the penny plan

The One Cent Solution is beautifully simple: If the government cuts one cent out of every dollar of its total spending (excluding interest payments) each year for five years, and then caps overall federal spending at 18 percent of national income from then on, we can:

Reduce federal spending by $7.5 trillion over 10 years.
Balance the budget by 2019.

It's only a penny for each dollar spent. Why would it get liberals so bent out of shape to cut only a penny for every dollar in spending?

[_Brackite]

Discovery Channel - Global Warming, What You Need To Know, with Tom Brokaw:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcVwLrAavyA


Global Warming Debate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2gXv3GH3Us


Weather Versus Climate Change:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBdxDFpDp_k