Tillerino
Dr. Lucky Tran 
Great illustration of how astroturf groups and unchecked opinion pieces create doubt in science. Sound familiar?
Michael Busch@luckytran I regret to report the contents of my spam folder; which has sometimes included black hole denialists.
This does not negate the point of the cartoon.
It is to say that disinformation about almost all facts exists; and is selectively promoted by various groups of people according to their goals.
Karl Magnacca@michael_w_busch @luckytran Andy Schlafly (Phyllis’ son, who runs Conservapedia) had a lengthy post about how black holes are a liberal conspiracy to keep people from reading the Bible. As you said, it’s not what crankery is out there, it’s what gets astroturfed to the larger public.
Chusi@luckytran Very familiar
msgbi
Voron@luckytran astroturfed 🤔 oh you mean a group that appears to be a grass roots thing but is really orchestrated & funded by ultra rich types?
🤔
Weird how a lot of our problems keep coming back to that 👆
Maybe there was a reason for a massively high top tax bracket, high estate tax, having stock buy backs illegal, etc… just maybe they learned something after the rich almost destroyed the country before 🤷♂️
🤔
Weird how a lot of our problems keep coming back to that 👆
Maybe there was a reason for a massively high top tax bracket, high estate tax, having stock buy backs illegal, etc… just maybe they learned something after the rich almost destroyed the country before 🤷♂️
Espinada@luckytran
Taking advantage of the ignorant to destroy the world.
Taking advantage of the ignorant to destroy the world.
Supportive Tree-based lifeform@luckytran
Oil companies be like "its just good business".
Oil companies be like "its just good business".
Christian Kent@luckytran @SoftwareTheron It is fascinating how chemists were employed by oil companies and that’s when global warming was discovered
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, CHEMISTRY” so the chemists brought in the climate scientists
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, SCIENCE” so the scientists brought in the mathematicians
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, MATHS” so the mathematicians brought in the philosophers
@luckytran @SoftwareTheron By this stage people were getting proper scared, and the philosophers were the most feeble ones yet
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, TRUTH” so people called the police, the lawyers, anyone for help
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, GOVERNMENT” and everyone said right, let’s vote on it
A couple of people raised a finger and murmured
“wait, don’t you think, you should expect again…”
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, DEMOCRACY” and this time everybody looked around nervously … and noticed some people had disappeared. Finally, a businessman rose up and pleaded: at least just think about the cost?
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, ECONOMY” and suddenly everyone noticed a lot more folks had gone, and the rest were looking a bit dirty or just tired. Before anyone could rush to stop it, someone cried out that they were in pain.
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, HEALTH” and everything was suddenly silent. People knew. Everyone’s thoughts were aligned. Nobody had to say anything. And yet, most of them were glad when one person quietly, but clearly, wished out loud they weren’t controlled by someone else.
The billionaires said “SHUT UP, FREEDOM” and nobody knew what really happened next because it was pitch dark. Nobody could hear each other. But at least they could speak to themselves, and hear their own thoughts.
@ckent @luckytran First global warming prediction involving actual science, that I know of, is Svante Arrhenius, in 1896, at which time he was a university lecturer.
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran I’m fascinated by the first person who didn’t just know about it, but also believed it and then lied about *not* believing it
Which would almost certainly have been an oil industry executive
This was shortly before the first person who actively heard about it and chose not to believe it. For deniers to exist, first you need a believer who becomes a traitor.
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran FWIW I think we’ve spent so many decades trying to shore up the arguments and scientific proof
When that was never the problem. It was all the lying from people who already knew the truth, that was the real problem
Somebody is always patient zero when it comes to spreading lies
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Imagine the societal benefit if we found a really long-ago liar and they (“he”, surely) decided to confess that they invented a part of climate denialism and were lying all along
And if that person was the one who designed a way to spread it via things like the Cato Institute or Heritage Foundation, and explained that method in a confession
The impact would eclipse anything from yet another IPCC report confirming what we already knew
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Since Rio 1990, too much of the consensus view’s reaction to the insincere opposition has been relying on reason to win over public opinion
When it’s never reason that wins this kind of debate, but emotion
Psychology knows this. There are books about how to help friends and family escape cults.
@ckent @luckytran Problem is, if we are to reject the reasoned approach, you don't want books about getting out of cults.
You need a book about forming them.
You need a book about forming them.
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Both approaches work, and you can apply reason to handle unreasonable people
But your book sounds too much like Goebells and his propaganda manual?
@ckent @luckytran You've rejected a reasoned approach. So...
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Well I’m reasoning that cults are effective but also dangerous 😓
@ckent @luckytran Is anything else effective?
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Yep, and the many examples of unintended government incentives are weird and surprising: https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/22919305 by Andrew Leigh, ALP MP — who just needs you to know, policy is more important than you thought
Meanwhile, deprogramming people from cults requires an emotional link (and not at all an appeal to reason): https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/45318399-stop-being-reasonable
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran I also get uncomfortable when people join me on clean energy for cult-ish reasons
That's mostly because of personal taste, heritage & responsibility. But there's a practical side to prevent abuse of good will:
The 'plastic straws' & 'carbon footprint' initiatives channel all that good will into a delay and distraction mechanism that benefits big polluters who actually make the big decisions to pollute. They invented high-hanging fruit for more effort, less impact.
@ckent @luckytran Disagree. We are in a dire position and we need everyone on side, because every gram makes a difference. The key to me is in taking that willingness to act and extending it; not disparaging it, not reducing it.
What we need is "Good; what next?"
What we need is "Good; what next?"
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Interesting and I take your argument in sincerity
Do you however, believe or not that the intended goal was achieved when BP invented "carbon footprint" for propaganda?
@ckent @luckytran Don't know, don't care.
INVOLVE people!
You will not get change any other way. Any other way will just be an imposition, and people will push back (which will instantly be weaponised by those who want to keep fossil fuels).
INVOLVE people!
You will not get change any other way. Any other way will just be an imposition, and people will push back (which will instantly be weaponised by those who want to keep fossil fuels).
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran OK.
Well, if there's any chance I can change your mind — (and Mastodon is a nice place where this isn't the meat-and-potatoes of discussion) — I'd like everybody to know and care
BP did get people involved (except of course the people never knew who started it).
BP's little invention soaked up enthusiasm. In a way that didn't reduce CO2, or 1% as much as BP kept increasing it.
BP's little invention also deflected the same people from demanding BP to change.
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Nobody explains it better than James Hoffman in 25 seconds, as a quick aside during a discussion about disposable coffee pods (Nestlé, looking at you):
Coffee Pods Are Good For The Planet Now?!
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Climate Town guy is definitely one of the biggest climate activists on all of YouTube
(Do you like him? Agree with him? If not I'd love to hear why — he knows more facts and history than anyone else I've seen)
This is the one where he tackles it: https://youtu.be/1J9LOqiXdpE
Why your 'Carbon Footprint' Is A Lie | Climate Town
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Yet of course you're absolutely right:
Correct: You will not get change any other way.
Correct: Any other way will just be an imposition, and people will push back
Correct: (which will instantly be weaponised by those who want to keep fossil fuels)
And that's why the polluters — with billions in their pocket — use the Four Stage Strategy that's been around since "Yes Minister" explained it in 20 seconds https://youtu.be/nSXIetP5iak
Deflection is death to success
The Four Stage Strategy.
@ckent @luckytran It may have delayed it. But now people can see that it can be done; that they can produce change. That can be turned into action.
IMO you still need government, because anything else is too slow.
IMO you still need government, because anything else is too slow.
@ckent @luckytran Thanks, I'll read the Leigh book.
But the idea that we can do what we need with _unintended_ incentives? Non-starter.
But the idea that we can do what we need with _unintended_ incentives? Non-starter.
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran yep :-) I mean, Andrew Leigh's thesis is to CHERISH government policy and the power it wields
But just, first, be aware of its power
Because I can bet you, it wasn't a woman's idea to commence the Baby Bonus policy on a nominated calendar date
@ckent @luckytran Power's the point... won't work without it.
@SoftwareTheron @luckytran Right, well, the "paper straw" cult is effective at replacing plastic straws, as we've seen
But it's only high-hanging fruit at best. The single biggest cause of ocean plastic pollution is 5,000 worse IIRC.
@ckent @luckytran We have the Exxon studies from the 1980s. That seems not to have scratched the surface.