I'm convinced that 95% of sports media members are to the left and most now feel emboldened to share their viewpoints. The other 5% either keep their mouths shut or leave on their own like Michele Tafoya.

What the fuck does that even mean? Yes - people like temperature control in all parts of the country. People who own stadiums also like them to be operable year round.

What a dumbass.

Podcasts have really exposed the soft underbelly of outlets like WSCR where you hear the same thing from people who think the same way over and over again, rather than taking advantage of the live on air opportunity to give something unique the guests/hosts seem almost paralyzed by the fear of either saying something offensive, or offending their minders.

Whenever you hear someone give you political takes that are not only tedious because you've heard them repeated time after time, but also insulting to the intelligence of anyone that has access to the internet and at least a little bit of intellectual curiosity, one tends to dismiss all of their sports thoughts as well because that person has shown to be an individual that simply is repeating what they are told, and not able to do any actual thinking for themselves. You can get the same thing in 5 seconds from any other media outlet, so why waste time listening to them?

Climate Change is like forced masking- a political movement rather than anything backed by real science.

There is science and there is justice. When you need to use modifiers like "climate" or "social", you're pimping a political agenda.

Then it should be easy for you to expose the ideological bias contained in the report's key findings without relying on ad hominem attacks. Go ahead and have at it.

I haven't made any ad hominem attack. Taking measurements is science. I don't disagree with accurate measurements. Who would? Where it turns into politics is in the conclusions and "WHAT MUST BE DONE."

I can go back to the fifties and show you articles with similar climate alarmism as we see today. In the 70s there was an "Ice Age" scare.

If scientific measurements suggest that the climate is changing, I take no issue with that. In fact, I'd be shocked if they didn't. The climate has always changed. I don't even take issue over man's effect although how great said effect is isn't as cut and dried as those who stand to benefit from "Climate Crisis" would like us to believe.

I would submit that climate change may be a problem. It's certainly not a CRISIS. And the best way to deal with the problem isn't to go back to living like medieval peasants. Because those that aren't forced to won't.

I would think the useless, failed, and ultimately destructive measures that were impulsively and politically taken to "FIGHT COVID" would be an object lesson regarding how not to approach the problem of our changing climate.

I finished the book Unsettled by a guy who led climate policy in the Obama administration. It was not particularly interesting, but it was even handed and dispelled a lot of the stuff coming out of both sides.

Clearly, there is a ton of alarmism going on and also lots of faulty assumptions and estimates into models that are pitched as accurate.

And yet directionally the climate folks are right. The big lie is that we can do anything substantial (read politically palatable) to stop it and need to focus on mitigation.

You said that "climate science" is "pimping" a political agenda. I asked you to prove your point. You haven't done so.

I finished the book Unsettled by a guy who led climate policy in the Obama administration. It was not particularly interesting, but it was even handed and dispelled a lot of the stuff coming out of both sides.

Clearly, there is a ton of alarmism going on and also lots of faulty assumptions and estimates into models that are pitched as accurate.

And yet directionally the climate folks are right. The big lie is that we can do anything substantial (read politically palatable) to stop it and need to focus on mitigation.

When someone uses the term "climate scientist" you can be certain that a political agenda is involved. Is the fact that there is a "Context" disclaimer posted on this video that would not be posted on a video that promoted the idea that there is a "Climate Emergency" that demands you radically change your lifestyle enough proof for you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwvVephTIHU

This isn't proof of anything.

Are you arguing that "Climate Change" isn't highly politicized?

Most podcasts suck and 99.5% of the ones that cover local sports are no more elevated than someone posting here.