Jordan Peterson's Rant in the National Post

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by rubecube

What an absolute clown.

God forgive you for celebrating his pain

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

God forgive you for celebrating his pain

Like what is his solution? Just keep lying to ourselves like we have been for the previous 4-5 decades?

I do agree that the overpopulation argument is deranged eco-fascism, but honestly I think the negatives of having children from both a personal and societal perspective far outweigh the positives, especially for people under a certain income threshold.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Omg, barf.

No it’s probably because anyone with half a brain who isn’t an insanely ideological extremist biased clown and who understands energy systems realizes that what many people on the Island and in Vancouver advocate for would be literal societal ruin and magnitude worse outcomes than climate change. Unless of course you hate people which is possible but also not a reasonable position worth taking seriously.

How did the island get so ass backwards in its energy literacy? Read a book and figure some stuff out before telling the entire planet how to change their entire life.

Whoops.

https://www.desmog.com/2022/01/28/jo...ed-think-tank/

The Canadian psychologist was widely criticised for spreading climate misinformation this week after telling the popular Joe Rogan podcast’s 11 million subscribers that climate models were full of errors that increase over time, and that climate is too complicated to model accurately.

Peterson responded to the criticism on Thursday in tweets to his 2.2 million followers citing a book called “Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming’s Unfinished Debate” by S Fred Singer.

Singer, an American atmospheric physicist who died in 2020, argued that climate change was natural and not increased by human-caused carbon dioxide emissions. He argued that warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions was “trivial”.

In 1990 he founded the Science and Environment Policy Project (SEPP) that expounded these views. In 2014 DeSmog revealed that Singer received $5,000 a month from US right-wing think tank the Heartland Institute, which has taken donations from oil interests including ExxonMobil and the Koch family. Singer was a speaker at a 2012 Heartland conference where sponsors received $67 million from Exxon, Koch and the Scaife Family Foundations.

Singer frequently criticised climate modelling by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the peer-reviewed authority on climate science made up of hundreds of climate scientists.

In a 2016 article for American Thinker, Singer wrote: “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has to provide proof for significant human-caused climate change; yet their climate models have never been validated and are rapidly diverging from actual observations.

“The real threat to humanity comes not from any (trivial) greenhouse warming but from cooling periods creating food shortages and famines.”

[Zarley]

I listened to the Rogan episode and it was good, Peterson is an engaging interview. I don't agree with his views on a number of subjects - particularly religion, but he's an interesting and thought provoking speaker while Rogan is a talented interviewer.

It's unfortunate that Peterson is such a controversial figure when his message for people is generally of hope, maturity, and taking responsibility for one's actions. It's a reflection of how uncomfortable a certain segment of the population gets when challenged by a viewpoint contrary to their own personal orthodoxy.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

Peterson attempts to clarify his climate comments on Rogan's podcast earlier this week in the most convoluted way possible; he's also given up on a simple spell check.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1487024689650323460

He sees YOUNG MEN all the time.

A few years ago everyone was snowflakes. Now talking about climate change and covid mitigations is causing everyone to fall apart. Pick a lane.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

A few years ago everyone was snowflakes. Now talking about climate change and covid mitigations is causing everyone to fall apart. Pick a lane.

I don't agree with a lot of what Peterson says. I also think he is clearly dog whistling more right wing views in order to profit financially.

I'm also very pro climate action, but I do agree that the climate models, particularly those shown in undergraduate classes, are very alarmist. If young adults are sterilizing themselves based on exaggerated climate models, that's a very serious issue. I don't know anyone who's gone as far as to get their tubes tied personally, but I do know people who've forgone having children. There's been posts on this board of people stating they won't have children due to worries about what the world will look like in 50 years.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by blankall

I don't agree with a lot of what Peterson says. I also think he is clearly dog whistling more right wing views in order to profit financially.

I'm also very pro climate action, but I do agree that the climate models, particularly those shown in undergraduate classes, are very alarmist. If young adults are sterilizing themselves based on exaggerated climate models, that's a very serious issue. I don't know anyone who's gone as far as to get their tubes tied personally, but I do know people who've forgone having children. There's been posts on this board of people stating they won't have children due to worries about what the world will look like in 50 years.

But this is the problem with JP. He consistently takes individual anecdotes and extrapolates them into alarming trends. Climate change definitely played a role in my decision to never have kids, but it was more along the lines of me thinking it irresponsible to bring a child into a world with such an uncertain future. And even at that point, it was probably the lowest ranked among the list of reasons that I decided not to.

[Ozy_Flame]

There's a bevy of reasons why young people might be choosing not to have children. Climate change and overpopulation might be one of them, but I would hazard to guess the middle class dream of house ownership and no debt is floating away, unreachable to many millennials and Gen Z who are realizing its just not realistic in the same way it was for their parents. Lots of reasons to not have children and that's perfectly acceptable. Free society, right?

Much like any odd behavior in life, those getting "sterilized based on climate" is a very, very small percentage of the general population and it's really not the concern Peterson is making it out to be.

People do a lot of stupid things, including eating tide pods and tattoo their #######s. Doesn't mean it's some sort of "mass movement" conspiracy.

[rubecube]

Only the brightest intellectuals tweet like attention-starved 14 year-old girls.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1487171252502552581

[blankall]

Originally Posted by rubecube

But this is the problem with JP. He consistently takes individual anecdotes and extrapolates them into alarming trends. Climate change definitely played a role in my decision to never have kids, but it was more along the lines of me thinking it irresponsible to bring a child into a world with such an uncertain future. And even at that point, it was probably the lowest ranked among the list of reasons that I decided not to.

On no. I totally agree with you on JP.

He weaves the most extreme examples into his narratives to create conclusions that aren't really supportable. It's the exact same tactic that the people he is rallying against use.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by blankall

I don't agree with a lot of what Peterson says. I also think he is clearly dog whistling more right wing views in order to profit financially.

I'm also very pro climate action, but I do agree that the climate models, particularly those shown in undergraduate classes, are very alarmist. If young adults are sterilizing themselves based on exaggerated climate models, that's a very serious issue. I don't know anyone who's gone as far as to get their tubes tied personally, but I do know people who've forgone having children. There's been posts on this board of people stating they won't have children due to worries about what the world will look like in 50 years.

They're not even a little bit alarmist.

Every commonly shown model I've ever seen is from the conservative end of predictions, due to the simple fact that scientists in large masses are quite conservative in what they predict in public because it's always so difficult to reach a consensus on anything else.

It's actually unlikely we'll have it as easy.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Itse

They're not even a little bit alarmist.

Every commonly shown model I've ever seen is from the conservative end of predictions, due to the simple fact that scientists in large masses are quite conservative in what they predict in public because it's always so difficult to reach a consensus on anything else.

It's actually unlikely we'll have it as easy.

There's certainly academics from non-science related fields, who like to put their own "spin" on things. It's hard to appreciate unless you are in the academic environment.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by blankall

There's certainly academics from non-science related fields, who like to put their own "spin" on things. It's hard to appreciate unless you are in the academic environment.

Not sure what you mean by that. The only thing I really saw in social sciences when I was in school was discussions about the disproportionate impact on the global South and the effects that would have on things like migration, social disorder, etc.

[CliffFletcher]

You honestly haven’t seen academics and activists citing global warming as an indictment of capitalism, and a last chance for humanity to discard it and adopt a different system before the earth becomes uninhabitable? I see that argument made a couple times a month on the Guardian alone.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I don’t care how good self driving technology becomes - you still need people to be behind the wheel if something goes wrong.

You should look at the Tesla thread. Elon can do no wrong and full FSD in a year.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

You honestly haven’t seen academics and activists citing global warming as an indictment of capitalism, and a last chance for humanity to discard it and adopt a different system before the earth becomes uninhabitable? I see that argument made a couple times a month on the Guardian alone.

I don't see a major problem with that opinion, other than it's an opinion and not a provable fact.

But it's a perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw by looking at the observable facts, even if it's not the only possible conclusion.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

You honestly haven’t seen academics and activists citing global warming as an indictment of capitalism, and a last chance for humanity to discard it and adopt a different system before the earth becomes uninhabitable? I see that argument made a couple times a month on the Guardian alone.

You're adorable.

Anyways...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1487010525938520064

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You're adorable.

Anyways...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1487010525938520064

I'm not a fan of either Rogan or Peterson...

But

Can I get some context here? It's so bat crap crazy I can't figure out what they're alluding to.

[81MC]

Pretty sure they were jesting regarding Carol Adams sexual politics of meat.

[jayswin]

I like how the 5th comment is "the intellectual dark web"...which is a thread on CP.