Hacker News Reader

Comment by olivermarks | Hacker News Reader

Sadly Wikipedia has now lost all credibility, and is not a credible resource for anything even vaguely controversial.

Many people think 'global warming' (or 'climate change' as it now called) is 80% snake oil and that there are many alarmist evangelizing grifters making a fortune and changing the global balance of power in its name.

This is another failed example of 'trust me I'm a scientist' that has lost a large segment of our population.

Honesty and transparency would solve most of this, not just insulting people and accusing them of believing in heretic theories that have been cooked up by a secret cabal of 'non existent' conspirators. Yuo don't win hearts and minds that way.

View on HN

This discussion goes nowhere if you reject the credibility of anyone you disagree with.

In that case, you also have lost all credibility. And you can say I've no credibility either.

> This is another failed example of 'trust me I'm a scientist'

No, it isn't. There's a large amount of engineering to do to make these work. How are the chemicals deployed? Who designed the deployment mechanism? Who makes the chemicals? How and where are they stored? Who transports them to the airports? Who is in charge of safety should things go wrong? If one of these flights crashes, how is evidence destroyed so it stays secret? Where are these flights based? Who are the flight crew? Why do airlines and cargo flight operators do this work? Is it more profitable than flying passengers and cargo? Or are there secret orders requiring them to work?

Somehow all of these operations must be kept secret.

"Trust me I'm a scientist" answers precisely none of these questions, any more than "trust me I'm Batman" does.

Where are the credible information sources which show theis required infrastructure exists? Because all I hear is "trust me, scientists can do it." Which carries no credibility.

Let me see..

You discredit the media. You discredit Wikipedia. You discredit the scientists. Then you make up some numbers to support your claim that people are being fooled by a powerful group working in the shadows.

I'm sorry, isn't this starting to sound like a conspiracy theory??

My comments are about the sad state of credible information sources, not the actual topic being discussed. No need to apologize, it's easy to go down the paranoia rabbit hole and label anyone who questions your rigid beliefs.

> Many people think 'global warming' (or 'climate change' as it now called) is 80% snake oil and that there are many alarmist evangelizing grifters making a fortune and changing the global balance of power in its name.

Who cares at all what “many people think”? How is that even a relevant consideration when deciding what and how to report?

The job of media should not be to coddle people or be a “safe space” that validates their nutty notions, it should be to report the truth. Convey uncertainty when it exists, but don’t invent false balance just to make viewers feel better about themselves. The truth is climate change is real and chemtrails are not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com