2011-07-29 13:41:01New SkS series: "Limbaugh's Limburger"
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Rush Limbaugh says "almost no temperature records were broken" during the recent heat wave, and Newsbusters writer Noel Sheppard says there were "only 34 new all-time daily temperature records set." Only 34? Why, that's barely a record-breaking heat wave at all! Except for the fact that a) 34 records is nothing to sneeze at and b) by "34," Sheppard means "somewhere between 70 and 7,612."

Source: "Conservative pundits deny existence of record-breaking heat wave." Grist, July 26, 2011

to access the entir article, click here

 

2011-07-29 15:10:30
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.190

I don't like the idea of doing a series on a right-wing media personality.  I feel dirty just listening to Limbaugh, or reading what he's said.  Everyone knows he's a whackjob, outside of his whackjob fanbase.  I don't think it would do much good to do any posts about him.  The only people who take him seriously wouldn't take us seriously.

2011-07-29 16:57:54dana1981
citizenschallenge
Peter Miesler
citizenschallenge7@gmail...
166.128.173.184

ditto

2011-07-29 17:24:19
Paul D

chillcast@googlemail...
82.18.130.183

It doesn't have a lot of relevance out side the US.
No one here (with brain cells at least) would listen to Limbaugh unless his words were edited into some other programme, probably about American politics. Maybe if like Monckton he went on some sort of tour around the world, spreading crap it might be worth it. But I suspect the idea of leaving the US would scare him to hell!

Added: Also I would have thought that given he only really has a voice in the US, why help him get a bigger audience outside??

2011-07-29 23:19:02Double standard?
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Pray tell, what is the difference between Rush Limbaugh and Lord Monckton? 

2011-07-29 23:39:55
Alex C

coultera@umich...
67.149.101.148

Monckton tours and is a major figurehead in the skeptic community for starters.  He's also a politician, as opposed to a media personality, as Dana put it.  We have already implemented several pages and databases to addressing myths put forth by politicians, so there is precedent, but I know of none that deal with folks in the media, aside from occasional single posts.

2011-07-30 07:41:06
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.111.250

There is a difference: I don't think anyone, even dittoheads, expect to get facts from Limbaugh: they expect amusement plus "correct" political orientation. We can't really change or correct his orientation.

2011-07-30 08:10:26
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.190

Monckton claims to be something of an expert on climate sensitivity.  He claims to have lectured at faculty level on the subject.  The APS published his error-riddled paper in its newsletter.  He's testified before US Congress.  Like it or not, people take Monckton seriously for whatever reason when it comes to climate.  He's good at sounding like he knows what he's talking about.  With Limbaugh, people know they're getting right-wing propaganda, not science.

2011-07-30 09:10:49
Same Ordinary Fool

chicagoriverturning@gmail...
184.98.21.140

I can think of only one possible reason for considering such a sordid, large-scale, and potential-tar-baby of a project.

Changing someone's mind..........Coby Beck's Jul 22 blogpost, "Ever wonder...?", on A Few Things Illconsidered, discusses a recent psychology paper about how hard it is to change people's minds:  "Setting the record straight almost impossible".  It, "shows how insidiously difficult it is to remove information once it is planted in the mind."

http://www.scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2011/07/ever_wonder.php   

"But one line from Dr. Eckar:  "If you make them SUSPICIOUS of why that information was presented in the first place, such as by saying it was a deliberate attempt TO MISLEAD YOU, then they can more readily dismiss it."  does give some of that hope back."  emphasis mine

Rush Limbaugh is a personal institution with a core following that reason will never reach.  But there are other listeners and occasional listeners who harbor some doubts about his general veracity.  And when shown all his skeptic lies on climate issues, and noting the extent and consistency, may be led to further doubts about Rush Limbaugh. And hopefully they'd make the jump, and become, "SUSPICIOUS of why that information was presented in the first place."

Chronology...............One safe way to present the subject in a somewhat neutral (Call a lie a "lie", but don't mention that a lie is a bad thing.) month by month chronology.  To be safe, this would have to be a large scale project, with lots of links, but published only once or twice a year.

I did learn, in one 5-minute encounter (all that I can endure), that Roy Spencer is Limbaugh's climate advisor.  Which brings up complications.  They aren't all lies.  Will need a thesaurus to choose the variants.  but  skeptic climate science must get a little more respect.

So, in this suggestion, the issue is not whether Rush Limbaugh fits an Sks group of skeptics.  But whether his low credibility can be utilized in this way.  Does this follow from Ullrich Eckar's (University of Western Australia) paper?  These are psychology questions.

2011-07-30 10:33:31Some Ordinary Fool
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Your observations are right on the money.

2011-07-30 18:50:38
Paul D

chillcast@googlemail...
82.18.130.183

One of my main concerns is the Americanisation of this web site. Although I recognise the need to help Americans tackle internal political problems in order to change the mind set regarding climate change policies, I don't think it helps at all by distributing those problems across the planet like a second wave of American consumerism, whether that promotion is from the left or right.

I don't know what the balance is, only that every idea relating to this subject should be analysed, to see whether the idea behind it is just a projection of internal issues, or the idea has genuine global interest that is a positive example.

It makes no sense at all in making this a battleground for American politics and problems, which look like only escalating. What the site should do, is set an example of improvement and encouragement.

Apologioes if this might cause offense, it isn't intended to, rather I think we all need to analyse whether what we propose is of benefit to all those that participate, where ever they live on the planet.

How about addressing the balance by tackling an Asian or Continental European skeptic instead??

Although I am not sure that really supports my argument!!

2011-07-30 19:54:52
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.108.84

I think a valid reason for a very strong interest in US issues is that the US is the big stone sitting in the road: If we can get the US moving, the rest of the world will follow. If we never get the US to move, China will also hold back, and the rest of the world will not be able to succeed either.

I also think Australia is important, because if Oz moves, even out ahead in front, it will make some impression on the US. Unfortunately, the US folks have taken a "It's only Europe" attitude towards what's happening on the Continent (and probably in the UK too).

2011-07-30 20:24:25
Paul D

chillcast@googlemail...
82.18.130.183

I don't disagree Neal. I think however the method and the reaction of those outside the US are my concern.
Given that I can not vote in American elections, my interest or desire to be inundated by American politics is limited.
Plus if it is over done, it just becomes another form of American ideology being spread and you are just doing the same work that was policy in the past (cold war propaganda).

The list of American politicians in climate myths is a good example. I don't have a clue who most of them are, if you widen that to a greater global audience, then interest in the list will be even lower. Do I want to know who they are?? Not really, because I feel I would be neglecting my own nations problems.

I agree that you and others need assistance. But exactly what help are you asking for??

I think I am just becoming wary of where this is all going and whether after some time it would just become another 'environmental' site that has the same flavour as every other site.

Instead of changing things in the US, you could just end up spreading the American problem to others around the world!

To be honest, I don't know the answers, I just think people need to think twice before doing something.
I think we should all be aware of our own tendencies to be interested in our own nations issues and maybe consider others occasionally. Again I don't have easy answers, but part of the solution is discussion on this forum and alerting people to possible issues.

2011-07-30 21:49:19Interesting higher level discussion
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.9.229
This is an interesting conversation and the type we should be having here. SOF, thanks for bringing up that research by Eckar (coauthored by Steve Lewandowsky who I'm doing the current SkS science blog experiment with). I don't have an answer to this question right now but I've loaded Ecker's research and a bunch of other research into countering misinformation. That's my holiday homework. I hope to return with some insights in a week's time.
2011-07-31 00:12:43This discussion...
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

...also ties back to my suggestion (made a few weeks ago on another thread) that the concept of creating country-specific SkS satellite sites be carefully thought through.  

PS -- While I can understand the concern over the "Americanization" of SkS, I'm not convinced that it is really happening. Speaking as an American, I believe that SkS has very pronounced Australian, New Zealand, and Great Britain flavor -- not that there is anything wrong with that. 

BTW -- My initial post on this tread was somewhat tongue-in-chaeek, My primary purpose was to bring to everyone's attention that Rush Limbaugh not only is a propoganda machine, but also an out-right liar.  Unfortunately, a segement of the American population, espeically here in South Carolina, believes every word that he utters. 

2011-07-31 00:18:36
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.108.84

Anyone who takes Limbaugh literally is beyond our reach.

2011-07-31 01:13:08
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.190
No offense badger, but South Caroline is kind of a whacky state :-) In California (kind of the other extreme on the political spectrum), Limbaugh has next to zero influence. I'm always shocked when I hear somebody listening to Limbaugh around here, it's so rare. So it probably seems to you like he has more influence than he actually does because you're in his territory. And as neal and I have noted, almost anyone who listens to Limbaugh will not listen to us. Some good points made about Americanization, but like badger, I still feel like the site has a strong international flavor in general.
2011-07-31 01:16:10nealjking
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

I suspect that there is considerable overlap in the universe of people in the US who take Limbaugh literally and the universe of people who take Fox News literally.

As Hitler and his henchmen proved, it only takes a small ban of dedicated fanatics to take over a country.

This is the ultimate goal of the Koch brothers and their ilk. They are just as rabid about ousting what they perceive to be a socialist government in the US as the Nazis were about ousting the Weimer Republic. 

2011-07-31 02:28:35
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.108.84

People who are going to believe Limbaugh literally are like soldiers in tanks: We can't "take them out" with rifles.

We're better off spending our energies going after people on whom we can make some impact. Arguing with Limbaugh's "position" is like trying to fight sea-level rise with a cup.

2011-07-31 04:24:48nealjking
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Why on Earth do you believe that any of Limbaugh's dittoheads would ever read anything posted on SkS?

Who is the target audience for Monckton Myth's series? Monckton followers?

 

 

2011-07-31 05:41:22Americans do pay attention to what Limbaugh says...
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

For example, read "Rush Limbaugh’s anti-Obama rant" posted yesteday (July 29) on the Washington Post website.

2011-07-31 06:06:52
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.108.84

People who read Monckton might conceivably read SkS.

People who believe in Limbaugh are NOT going to read SkS, not even for laughs.

2011-07-31 14:04:11
Alex C

coultera@umich...
67.149.101.148

I think that's quite beside the point Badger was trying to make Neal.  However, I wonder about whether or not it's even correct to assume that Limbaugh has such a "general listener" audience to which we can address points.  As a radio personality, how much external media time does he get?  Monckton is always being interviewed, always making speeches and tours that are talked about, is Rush ever talked about so much?  I don't recall him ever being so prevalent, him ever making points that others pick up on and rehash out en mass.

2011-08-01 02:02:37Alex C
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Good points.

For the record, I am not advocating the creation of a Limbaugh's Limburger series on SkS. I like the alliteration and smell of the title though. I may use it on the website that I am in the process of creating. 

2011-08-01 02:04:13dana1981
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

South Carolina: "Too small to be a country and too large to be an insane asylum." ???