Hmm I wonder what that sound is? Oh wait its the sound of fox scraping the bottom of barrel of things to blame games on. This really is laughable, I nearly split my sides reading the title alone.
Fox News Attacks Environmentally Conscious Games
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Esh, so much hate. It's probaly too late with 11 pages so far but I'll say this anyway.
Fox News isn't the only one responsible for bashing video games. It's used by every hack agenda that wants to try and make a mark. I mean all activies went through this, comic books, TV, radio for gods sake.
I mean Fox News yeah...this was stupid, even if it was on your early morning show but really CNN and other news organzations you can find clips of them spreading hate of video games and other media sources. It's just one of those things. Still yikes... I like Fox News but this is just stupid guys.
The other problem with this in the media is that the media still see's video games like Mario, Halo, or the God of War. Good games, but none the less they aren't the artistic or games that we argue take the genere into the art catgory so there you go.
Fox News isn't the only one responsible for bashing video games. It's used by every hack agenda that wants to try and make a mark. I mean all activies went through this, comic books, TV, radio for gods sake.
I mean Fox News yeah...this was stupid, even if it was on your early morning show but really CNN and other news organzations you can find clips of them spreading hate of video games and other media sources. It's just one of those things. Still yikes... I like Fox News but this is just stupid guys.
The other problem with this in the media is that the media still see's video games like Mario, Halo, or the God of War. Good games, but none the less they aren't the artistic or games that we argue take the genere into the art catgory so there you go.
Flower is about one thing.
PLANTING. MORE. OF. THESE.
What's wrong about that? Oh, that's right.
Planting foreign flowers is senseless propaganda and is just as bad as flagburning.
PLANTING. MORE. OF. THESE.
What's wrong about that? Oh, that's right.
Planting foreign flowers is senseless propaganda and is just as bad as flagburning.
Sure--the problem is when the wrong lessons are being taught. For instance, what the environmental movement of today seems to be telling us is that the worst and most dangerous form of pollution in the world is not something like mercury or lead, but the completely non-toxic gas carbon dioxide. They have made it sound like a small--fractional, even--increase in overall emissions will result in the annihilation of every living thing on the planet, a premise that SHOULD be ridiculed as absurd and hyperbolic, but instead is held up as the greatest of all truths.
The result of pursuing the boogeyman of carbon dioxide will mean industries will be gutted, electricity prices will skyrocket, and economies will be ruined... and sadly, for all their efforts, the global warming alarmists will fail to reduce the Earth's global temperatures by even a single degree. Even when they fail, however, instead of realizing the extent of their hubris they will merely insist that we haven't done enough and cause even more damage.
...but then again, Fate of the World is, as noted, not a game for kids, and it's unlikely that anyone except for global warming acolytes will play it anyway.
I'd say if only, but here's the answer.ZahrDalsk said:
EDIT:I pretty much understand that Fox News actually attack organizations that point them out for being wrong more than the other media stations, and go on the defensive, and keep asking why they get attacked when they pull crap like this.
I already thought the bar was set so low for Fox that it was right around the level of Satans plumbing, aparently the imposible happened, and it has hit bedrock (and you can't break through bedrock 
it's faux news, you don't take them seriously. At this point they are nothing more than a trolling news group. No this does not surprise me in the least, hell It's actually funny in way to me.. still it's just not that shocking as some are making it out to be.
UltraHammer said:
Look at this:
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-19/world/eco.globalwarmingsurvey_1_global-warming-climate-science-human-activity?_s=PM:WORLD
Now, I acknowledge that CNN has their own biases, but what is important is the statistics they are reporting on. 82% of the 3146 environmental scientists surveyed agreed that human activity has had "A significant impact" on global warming.
Now look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAJDaPlCHzU
"A lot of scientists say it's this, a lot say it's that." No. 82% say it's man made, which means 18% are not on their side. Distortion of statistics
There's also a difference between rude or foul language, and inflammatory language. A good example of inflammatory language is terms like "Liberal Agenda" or "Socialist" being used as epithets in order to debase alternative opinions. It is a similar practice to using the N-Word back in the day to annihilate a Black person's arguement. Plus, if you wish to lump swears and subversion in together, I didn't hire Yahtzee, and Movie Bob doesn't really go beyond what one could expect from contemporary, Western young adult conversation.
Outright lies? Well..."You get points for [act of violence]" in refference to video games never gets old.
Fox & Friends: 4 or 5 hosts, all of which have Right wing biases; Red Eye: Host is very Right, 2-3 panelists ranging from Middle Right to Far Right; Bill O'Reilly; 8/10 people to have hosted "The Five", with the Red Eye host as one of them, and Geraldo as one of the 2/10; Sean Hannity; Mike Huckabee; and rather than going on name-by-name, a cumulative tally, wherein I used Wikipedia's chart of FNC's lineup as a guide, and I automatically threw out anybody who was as far as Center Right, I still came up with ~60% of all anchors, not shows, having a Right Wing bias. Couple that with the fact that almost all of the ~40% being outnumbered on their shows by representatives of the ~60%, the fact that they use hard-line Right Wing experts like Ann Coulter far more often than, say, a Bill-Mahr-type (who is just as hard line and unfair to Conservatism as she is to Liberalism), and the fact that their biggest draws are O'Reilly, Hannity, and the Fox and Friends crew, and it is a fair statement to make that the Rights outnumber the Lefts, and that the message of the network is biased.
"Environmentalism", in the typical Western political vernacular means supporting sustainability, conservationism, and the reduction of pollution, which they consistently speak out against using aforementioned points.
And no, I am not against anti-environmentalism as a political movement, because it is not a political movement (or at least if it is, it is a very small movement with no world exposure). Literally any ideology, from Centrism to Fascism to Anarchism, if properly implemented can have a positive effect. Even ideologies which I oppose, which funny enough typically fall on the Left, I will argue against, as I am not in their favour, but I will not argue that the ideology as a whole is invalid.
And no, News is not about ideology. John Stewart and the such are Moderate Left, but they are also entertainers. They make no bones about being biased, nor do they claim to be legitimate News. Fox, as a station which passes itself off as real news shouldn't have bias in their programming. They should have anchors simply report on the state of affairs, what is happening based on facts and data. Their more in-depth analysis of things such as politics should have Political Science experts talking about the impact an action of a politician will have on a demographic in terms of tangible fact, or as much evidence as possible to support projections.
NEWS. SHOULD. NOT. HAVE. ANY. BIASSES. LEFT. OR. RIGHT.
Why trust a news source that lies? If i read something in a paper, i want to be reasonably sure its true. If not, whats the point? Its a fact that people who watch fox news come out even more ignorant on news then before, thats a statistical fact. Why? Because they misinform people. Why,if they misinform people, its just "the way the are", but other news misinform people, they need to APOLOGIZE, because they did something WRONG. THink about it. I mean, if they started STEALING, i guess anyone who says "stealing is wrong. Fox news shouldnt do that" is an idiot, right?Clonekiller said:
Lying is wrong.
Fox News needs to stop doing that.
Pretty simple.
Horny Ico said:
Nuclear plants melt down. They fall down. The safe distance from a nuclear meltdown is not even the other end of a city. You've got to go MILES to be safe from it, and even that is changed significantly by the wind. And really? Nobody's ever just dumped waste somewhere it shouldn't be? Like, oh, say, under a road in an urban region? And Sim City isn't in a nation, nor anything really analogous to a modern society. It's a city that just magically springs up with approximately 1960-present Western levels of technology, but plays by our world's rules. And nuclear waste, like many, many other things doesn't entirely leave what it touches, nor can you truly clean it all up. It seeps (if in Hard Water) or leaves behind flecks (if it's the actual material), which cause earth to become dead, and the same goes for anything alive.
That's gotta be a joke. Right? RIGHT? 50% of people don't pay income taxes as it stands, so there's no point in doing the whole lower taxes schtick. The difference between the republicans and the dems isn't lower taxes, but lower taxes on the ultra-wealthy vs. not. As for fiscal responsibility, when was the last time the deficit decreased under a republican president?Clonekiller said:
Moral of the story: pay attention to their actions, not their words. Repugnicans are a plague on the U.S.
I may have exaggerated--SLIGHTLY--but this comes pretty close:Anodos said:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=politics&sid=aBMsEXvtfiZI
The article mentions "more powerful hurricanes, devastating droughts and rising coastal waters" and "One global warming study warns that the Arctic ice cap might melt completely in as little as 34 years".
Sounds like a doomsday scenario to me!
Ok, and what is your criticism of this? Ice doesnt melt?RDubayoo said:
Edit: Not saying i agree with what theyre saying. But you dont give a counter arguement. Besides you saying that the gas is non-toxic (it is toxic) and that it doesnt create a greenhouse effect (it does)