OT: Apparently Irma's "graphics have been created to make it look like the ocean's having an exorcism"

Yes this is coming from Washington Post, but these are Rush's words. He cl aims in no uncertain terms that storms are exaggerated and supposedly even the satellite images are tampered with to boost business and promote the id ea of climate change:

"you have people in all of these government areas who believe man is causin g climate change, and they?re hellbent on proving it, they? re hellbent on demonstrating it, they?re hellbent on persuading peo ple of it.

And then things become clearer: the alt-right will go to extreme lengths to disqualify science and promote conspiracy theories if it fits them. And t hen he says he can't "legally" do his show from his house. WTF? He never says it's because of a massive hurricane. Sounds like a "hurricane denier" to me.

Did a hurricane really hit Houston and is there one heading for FL? Does H awaii exist? Are the Egyptian pyramids real? I've seen none of these thin gs personally so if I were an alt-righter, I'd deny all of them because.... that's what they do. But I know they exist because it's not that easy to f abricate something and keep that lie going long-term for things so many hav e personally seen and have a hand in.

formatting link

71
Reply to
lonmkusch
Loading thread data ...

claims in no uncertain terms that storms are exaggerated and supposedly eve n the satellite images are tampered with to boost business and promote the idea of climate change:

ing climate change, and they?re hellbent on proving it, they? ?re hellbent on demonstrating it, they?re hellbent on persuading people of it.

to disqualify science and promote conspiracy theories if it fits them. And then he says he can't "legally" do his show from his house. WTF? He neve r says it's because of a massive hurricane. Sounds like a "hurricane denie r" to me.

Hawaii exist? Are the Egyptian pyramids real? I've seen none of these th ings personally so if I were an alt-righter, I'd deny all of them because.. ..that's what they do. But I know they exist because it's not that easy to fabricate something and keep that lie going long-term for things so many h ave personally seen and have a hand in.

0871

Rush Limbaugh indicates he?s evacuating Palm Beach days after sugge sting Hurricane Irma is fake news

formatting link
cd

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

:

e claims in no uncertain terms that storms are exaggerated and supposedly e ven the satellite images are tampered with to boost business and promote th e idea of climate change:

using climate change, and they?re hellbent on proving it, they? ??re hellbent on demonstrating it, they?re hellbent on persuadi ng people of it.

s to disqualify science and promote conspiracy theories if it fits them. A nd then he says he can't "legally" do his show from his house. WTF? He ne ver says it's because of a massive hurricane. Sounds like a "hurricane den ier" to me.

es Hawaii exist? Are the Egyptian pyramids real? I've seen none of these things personally so if I were an alt-righter, I'd deny all of them because ....that's what they do. But I know they exist because it's not that easy to fabricate something and keep that lie going long-term for things so many have personally seen and have a hand in.

530871

gesting Hurricane Irma is fake news

cccd

Lying does have a tendency to catch up with the person telling the lies.

Reply to
lonmkusch

You can't legally have four doctors prescribe opioid medications to the same patient either but that didn't seem to bother him at the time.

Reply to
bitrex

s to disqualify science and promote conspiracy theories if it fits them. A nd then he says he can't "legally" do his show from his house. WTF? He ne ver says it's because of a massive hurricane. Sounds like a "hurricane den ier" to me.

LOL I forgot about that one. I'm sure it was some conspiracy against him.

Reply to
lonmkusch

No he did not say it was fake. He said leftists in the media tamper with images, and they have in the past.

Reply to
Tom Del Rosso

Can you point to an instance in which "leftists" tampered with images? And I'm not talking about anyone from either end of the politically extreme; I think most do not identify with them.

To suggest the mainstream media is tampering with satellite or radar images for some ulterior motive is laughable and paranoid.

Reply to
lonmkusch

I don't know about that, but somebody decided to change the definition of "ocean" in order to declare that Irma was the largest ever in the Atlantic Ocean.

formatting link

Reply to
Taxed and Spent

There was an image of an explosion in the Palestinian conflict that was heavily enhanced. And of course the letter Dan Rather reported to have been typed on a typewriter in 1972, with proportional font and full justification using the MS Word default margins.

Rather and other mainstream reporters are as extreme as anyone. In spite of the obvious fakery he still claims the letter was real.

Limbaugh, on the other hand, doesn't claim to be a reporter. He often uses satire, and anyone who has ever listened to him would understand that he was not "suggesting", but "joking."

Reply to
Tom Del Rosso

:

And I'm not talking about anyone from either end of the politically extrem e; I think most do not identify with them.

ages for some ulterior motive is laughable and paranoid.

And so this is now the fault of "leftists"? I did a quick search and the L A Times says it's the 2nd strongest, The Daily Beast says it's stronger tha n all others in 2017, and The Independent says one of the strongest. The l ink you reference refers to IFL Science, a website I'm not familiar with.

But let's assume more outlets claim it's the strongest for the sake of argu ment, which others may have. So what? This is hardly on par with Trump's crowd size claims, which is objective: number of people. Seems to me there 's multiple factors that determine how strong a hurricane is: pressure, win d speed, size, making this ranking a little subjective.

Reply to
lonmkusch

And? How is this significant? You think he's the only reporter or news ne twork accused of making something up? I've lied a few times, but it's not something I do every day.

Yes that's his cover. But many of his supporters take him at his word. On NPR several months ago there were some Republicans being interviewed who s aid Fox has become too liberal, so now they only trust Rush and Hannity. I 'm sure these people are not representative of all Republicans, but my poin t is many do take what Rush says as fact. It's complete nonsense to claim even 5% of his listeners do so because it's entertaining. Admit it, they'r e listening because he says what they want to hear, and it's posed as factu al.

Reply to
lonmkusch

Another thing: If this is all satire, why is he joking about Irma? Why is he claiming it's not nearly as bad as the media makes it, then says he can' t broadcast from his location in FL and makes absolutely no mention of why, instead saying it might not be 'legal'.

It's because of Irma, that's why, but he won't say it.

This is not satire. It's sick, that's what it is. Anyone who claims he's s trictly an entertainer is obviously making excuses because they like what h e says and either believes or hopes it's true.

Reply to
lonmkusch

maybe they changed their tune after being called on it. I hear network news saying it was the biggest ever.

And since when is a damaged house "destroyed"?

Reply to
Taxed and Spent

ote:

te:

? And I'm not talking about anyone from either end of the politically extr eme; I think most do not identify with them.

images for some ulterior motive is laughable and paranoid.

he LA Times says it's the 2nd strongest, The Daily Beast says it's stronger than all others in 2017, and The Independent says one of the strongest. T he link you reference refers to IFL Science, a website I'm not familiar wit h.

I've heard that too. But I fail to see how calling Irma the biggest Atlant ic hurricane ever is noteworthy. It's not like this is of any real signifi cance; it's going to cause great property loss and some loss of life regard less. And it's not like either political party is going to gain anything s ignificant weather it is or isn't. Exaggerating crowd sizes, on the other hand, is of obvious political importance.

Where do you see this? I did a text search and I'm not finding it in the a rticle (minus the comments), and not finding it in this thread. But since you asked, this seems quite subjective to me. For example, a house that's damaged could just as well be destroyed if it has to be completely torn dow n and rebuilt.

Reply to
lonmkusch

All the news media were talking about the Houston houses destroyed, then they showed some destroyed houses that had a two foot high water mark and the owners were cleaning it up. NOT destroyed.

They said some island had some high % destruction, then showed an aerial view where there was a lot of damage, but not all that was "destruction".

Reply to
Taxed and Spent

te:

rote:

er

es? And I'm not talking about anyone from either end of the politically ex treme; I think most do not identify with them.

r images for some ulterior motive is laughable and paranoid.

on

Anthony Watts is a paid denialist, and is happy to post anything that sugge sts that the current orthodoxy on anthropogenic global warming is in any wa y suspect. He's been through the statistics to find examples that don't tie up with current news reporting (according to his understanding of what the reporters are saying, which is biased towards finding something he can dia gree with). He an ex-TV weather front man, and doesn't seem to have any kin d of academic qualification - which wouldn't have stopped him learning enou gh to have useful opinions if he'd gone to the trouble, not that he seems t o have done that.

the LA Times says it's the 2nd strongest, The Daily Beast says it's strong er than all others in 2017, and The Independent says one of the strongest. The link you reference refers to IFL Science, a website I'm not familiar w ith.

k

It's still got that potential.

lantic hurricane ever is noteworthy. It's not like this is of any real sig nificance; it's going to cause great property loss and some loss of life re gardless. And it's not like either political party is going to gain anythi ng significant weather it is or isn't. Exaggerating crowd sizes, on the ot her hand, is of obvious political importance.

he article (minus the comments), and not finding it in this thread. But si nce you asked, this seems quite subjective to me. For example, a house tha t's damaged could just as well be destroyed if it has to be completely torn down and rebuilt.

The usual rule is not to assume a conspiracy when stupidity is an adequate explanation. Reporters tend to record more material than makes it to air, a nd editors have been known to take out the explanatory bits where the repor ter might have said that while those house were destroyed, these houses wer e merely damaged. Explanation is vital, but it doesn't hold the viewer's at tention like the image of a well-trashed house

So you captured the image, and counted the number of house that looked "des troyed" as opposed to "damaged"?

Once a house is damaged enough, it's cheaper to clear off the residue down to the foundations and start over. What may still be standing may not be in good shape.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

Tom Del Rosso wrote on 9/9/2017 5:44 PM:

Tee, hee, hee...

--
Rick C 

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms, 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
rickman

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote on 9/9/2017 8:21 PM:

That's one thing Rush has in common with Trump. Much of what he says doesn't actually say anything, it just has a lot of emotional content.

"nothing I say today should be considered to be a forecast or a prediction."

True, emotional content low.

"when it comes to a hurricane bearing down on south Florida, I?m the go-to guy."

True, wait, what? He just said it isn't a meteorologist, but he *is* the go to guy??? This sounds exactly like Trump when he claims he is the "best"

-fill in the blank- ever.

False, emotional content moderate.

"Do you realize here in south Florida, from where we are all the way down to Miami, you cannot buy bottled water."

Uh, true I guess... but how is this relevant to the hurricane? Emotional content rising...

"You know, if I were the Big Oil guys I?d be so jealous of the Big Water guys. The Big Water guys don?t have to drill for it..."

Who are "the Big Water guys"??? Isn't water supplied by the government unless you have your own well? Just how big is "Big Water"? Do we have a Big Water gap? What? Pure emotional content.

"The reason that I am leery of forecasts this far out, folks, is because I see how the system works."

I thought he wasn't going to deal with forecasts? The emotional content is maxing.

You can see how this is going. He isn't trying to talk about the storm. He is in the business of creating emotional swings that rival menopause. Without actually saying much of anything he can be called on, he rouses the rabble and stirs the pot.

Has Rush ever said anything that was of value?

--
Rick C 

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms, 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
rickman

te:

rote:

er

es? And I'm not talking about anyone from either end of the politically ex treme; I think most do not identify with them.

r images for some ulterior motive is laughable and paranoid.

on

the LA Times says it's the 2nd strongest, The Daily Beast says it's strong er than all others in 2017, and The Independent says one of the strongest. The link you reference refers to IFL Science, a website I'm not familiar w ith.

k

lantic hurricane ever is noteworthy. It's not like this is of any real sig nificance; it's going to cause great property loss and some loss of life re gardless. And it's not like either political party is going to gain anythi ng significant weather it is or isn't. Exaggerating crowd sizes, on the ot her hand, is of obvious political importance.

he article (minus the comments), and not finding it in this thread. But si nce you asked, this seems quite subjective to me. For example, a house tha t's damaged could just as well be destroyed if it has to be completely torn down and rebuilt.

Seems to me whether something is "destroyed" is more than a little subjecti ve. Again, this doesn't seem to have a political slant. Perhaps they migh t be exaggerating, but this term already has a lot of subjectivity in its d efinition and is really neither here nor there. In other words, I'd hesita te to call it intentional fabrication of facts.

Reply to
lonmkusch

of course. and the contrary is true. duh.

Reply to
Taxed and Spent

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.