Youth Decay posted:

https://twitter.com/SciHoss/status/1625187996223049728

Main Paineframe posted:

The problem is that if it comes down to treating our politics as a religion and evangelizing people without any regard for whether the poo poo we're saying is true or not, I'd bet that the lineup of career preachers and religious figures who've been packaging politics into their sermons for generations are going to be better at it than we are. On top of that, their message of "oppressing and murdering minorities will bring greatness to America and save the future" is an easier message to sell to the majority than "all of humanity will die if you don't accept some drops in your comfy first-world middle-class standard of living". Without facts, that doesn't mean people are likely to believe anything equally: they'll tend to lean toward whatever's most convenient and appealing.

It's also paternalistic and infantilizing as hell to treat people that way, but that's just a side objection compared to the fact that you're talking about dragging politics into the very arena that the right specializes in.

Main Paineframe posted:

On top of that, their message of "oppressing and murdering minorities will bring greatness to America and save the future" is an easier message to sell to the majority than "all of humanity will die if you don't accept some drops in your comfy first-world middle-class standard of living". Without facts, that doesn't mean people are likely to believe anything equally: they'll tend to lean toward whatever's most convenient and appealing.

Dick Trauma posted:

I love the reaction of the woman to the right and the fellow at bottom right.

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1625599476617322499?s=20&t=byO9SF6tHPhWUuw7k_h0WA

https://twitter.com/paulbeattystan/status/1625617296294027301?s=20&t=byO9SF6tHPhWUuw7k_h0WA

Craptacular! posted:

You don't target the middle class, though? It's more like, "the richest classes have convinced you that work is something you do not to find meaning or fulfillment but only because you have to for basic survival, and having established it as something that critical they devalue your work more and more to derive extra productivity from you by withholding necessity that much further."

It's not that far off from what Bernie says all the time, but it's more rhetorical and heated and perhaps most importantly it feeds a confirmation bias in the majority of people that they are a victim. Look at the conservative discourse about media bias and how it never changes no matter how much CNN kowtows to them and you'll see that being told you're a victim is the easy way to votes.

Fister Roboto posted:

Thank you. Since you're unsure on the matter, do you think that it's better to treat the issue with an abundance of caution, or not?

Gumball Gumption posted:

Lying to get what you want is literally just what politics are.

CuddleCryptid posted:

E. Reset the clock that we apparently need now

https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1625635380073574401?t=2rA1AmJgRoWUg4jl0cLfcg&s=19

Wayne Knight posted:

I wouldn't be surprised if this sort of thing were way more common than most people realize. It's like when a major celebrity dies, and then news sites continue running death stories for increasingly archaic "celebrities" most people have never heard of. It seems like it's happening more often, but it's just reported on more often.

Wayne Knight posted:

I wouldn't be surprised if this sort of thing were way more common than most people realize. It's like when a major celebrity dies, and then news sites continue running death stories for increasingly archaic "celebrities" most people have never heard of. It seems like it's happening more often, but it's just reported on more often.

Blue Footed Booby posted:

I don't understand why anyone would admit to thinking bald-faced lying is ok if it advances leftism. How could they not realize it's going to get thrown back in their face every time they disagree with anyone?

Google Jeb Bush posted:

I could see something like injuries caused by initial exposure being exacerbated by whatever, but as with the entire rest of this incident I'm withholding most judgement until we have more info. I mean, look at me opining about something I have a little knowledge in in the Houston derailment and then getting dumpstered with "actually it could be a traffic design fuckup, here's how"

If I am not adequately equipped to talk about train signalization in these individual cases, like hell am I equipped to make authoritative statements about how the EPA is wrong on vinyl chloride.

nine-gear crow posted:

2016 was probably the worst year for that because it just seemed like one flowed into the other so it felt like loving EVERYONE died in 2016 starting with Alan Rickman at the start of January and then ending with Carrie Fisher and Debbie Reynolds at the end of December.

Fister Roboto posted:

I'll fully admit that I'm a loving idiot and I rarely have any idea what I'm talking about. That's why I think it's important to err on the side of caution, more caution than what is currently being exercised, even if that means asserting that the EPA might not be 100% correct about this. I don't have any scientific data or expertise to back that opinion up, it's borne entirely out of my morals and values. It's nice to be technically correct, but maybe not so much when it means risking human lives.

I don't think the residents should be told it's safe to return until there isn't a shadow of a doubt. In the meantime, they should be handsomely accommodated and compensated for the hardship. It's only a town of 5000 people, it shouldn't be that hard. The governor should also be calling in FEMA to help. What's the worst that could happen if we're too cautious about this?

CuddleCryptid, thanks for the response, but my response to you is basically the same.

Koos Group posted:

Zero_Grade posted:

Duke's cousin fell in with a bad crowd at a young age, you hate to see it.

Fister Roboto posted:

It's not for "some reason", it's because residents of the town have reported medical issues and dead animals.

If beyond a shadow of a doubt is unreasonable, I'm fine with no dead animals.

Fister Roboto posted:

It's not for "some reason", it's because residents of the town have reported medical issues and dead animals.

If beyond a shadow of a doubt is unreasonable, I'm fine with no dead animals.

quote:

“EPA Region 5’s number one priority is – and will always be – the health and safety of communities across the region. That’s why as soon as EPA was notified of the Norfolk Southern train derailment on Friday, February 3, EPA personnel were on-site by 2 a.m. Saturday morning to assist with air monitoring. Since then, EPA has been boots-on-the-ground, leading robust air-quality testing – including with the state-of-the-art ASPECT plane and a mobile analytical laboratory – in and around East Palestine.

Since the fire went out on February 8, EPA air monitoring has not detected any levels of health concern in the community that are attributed to the train derailment. Air monitoring data was provided to state health agencies on February 8 for review prior to the state’s decision to lift the evacuation.

As of February 14, EPA has assisted with the screening of 396 homes under a voluntary screening program offered to residents, and no detections of vinyl chloride or hydrogen chloride were identified. 65 additional homes are scheduled for today. We are continuing to conduct 24/7 air-monitoring to ensure the health and safety of residents.

EPA Region 5 is also working closely with Ohio EPA to determine what impact the spill has had on surface and ground water. State and local agencies are conducting sampling throughout the Ohio River to ensure drinking water intakes aren’t affected, and EPA is continuing to assist the state with sampling efforts at water treatment intake points along the Ohio River.

EPA Region 5 also issued a general notice of potential liability letter to Norfolk Southern to document the release of hazardous contaminants. The letter outlines EPA actions at the site and the potential to hold the railroad accountable for associated costs under EPA’s CERCLA authority.

Earlier today, I affirmed to Governor DeWine that EPA Region 5 will continue to support the state of Ohio as they lead response efforts at the site of the train derailment. Through the coordinated efforts of emergency responders, we will continue to protect the health and safety of all residents.”

For more information, EPA Region 5 has established a dedicated phone line (215-814-2400) staffed by community coordinators and created a web page for residents to stay informed about the most up to date monitoring results

CuddleCryptid posted:

Few pages back but since this was asked to me before my "chill bro"

The issue is that while I don't believe that anyone who is reporting symptoms is being dishonest about what they are experiencing, there is a bit of a question about whether it's actually the fault of the leak or if it's unrelated and/or psychosomatic. I mean, we're hearing stories of citizens saying that they're suffering moderate to severe respiratory issues and burning eyes within minutes of entering the town. That's an extremely rapid onset of some pretty noticeable symptoms but the same thing isn't happening to any of the reporters or water/air testing monitor staff; and if it's that bad then the cleanup crew should be absolutely incapacitated, which they aren't.

If their symptoms can be linked to the train by their doctors then that's one thing, but absent any indication that the air is actually tainted in a significant way its hard to say that for sure. However it's not for nothing that fear of symptoms can manifest symptoms.

It's also compounded by people hundreds of miles away claiming that the event is causing damage (no buddy you have road salt on your car), or that frankly impossible things are happening like cows dropping dead in masses an unreasonable ways away. So basing "things must be worse than what the tests shows" on these "eyewitness accounts" isn't very reliable.

Gyges posted:

I think the most likely case is that the interiors of some structures, i.e. the homes people are returning to, are contaminated at an elevated level. Not necessarily at acutely dangerous levels or anything, but enough to cause some level of discomfort. The people then understandably freak out, which causes them to misremembered details like how soon and how severe their reaction was upon returning.

Also people returning to their homes are probably more likely to have extenuating health issues than people who have been showing up in the town to work, especially those involved in the clean up and testing. I have to get a yearly respiratory physical for UPS as a designated responder, I don't have to get any medical clearance to rent/buy a place to live.

Which isn't to say that the town is actually unsafe, or the EPA and others are lying/incompetent. Rather that there is likely a mix of extenuating circumstances that are resulting in an overall "safe" for the general area that isn't necessarily true on specific individual cases. Especially since we'll hear about someone who has a reaction, but are extremely unlikely to hear any reports about someone who is having no issues.

Baronash posted:

The EPA has screened 400 homes and not shown elevated levels of the relevant airborne contaminants in a single one so far. That’s obviously not exhaustive, but I’d argue that it speaks against the idea of a handful of specific houses being so severely contaminated as to provoke noticeable reactions in a short time frame.

Main Paineframe posted:

It's also paternalistic and infantilizing as hell to treat people that way, but that's just a side objection compared to the fact that you're talking about dragging politics into the very arena that the right specializes in.

Fister Roboto posted:

I'll fully admit that I'm a loving idiot and I rarely have any idea what I'm talking about. That's why I think it's important to err on the side of caution, more caution than what is currently being exercised, even if that means asserting that the EPA might not be 100% correct about this. I don't have any scientific data or expertise to back that opinion up, it's borne entirely out of my morals and values. It's nice to be technically correct, but maybe not so much when it means risking human lives.

selec posted:

We had climate experts from Exxon informing our climate policy for decades at the same time the company knew their PR was all lies. Experts come in a lot of flavors and you have to look at who is paying them. Plenty of experts went in front of cameras for years to say smoking was harmless. Some of them were doctors!

Expertise sits in the world’s most demonic consulting firms, and also the halls of universities and research institutions, but it’s foolish to try and claim all expertise is equal, or even that it is expertise at all, depending on the way it is being deployed.

Expertise is not enough. You have to want the same things I want before I can trust you.

Main Paineframe posted:

This is a perfect summation of the conspiracy theorist mindset. It's basically a very succinct and polite summary of the arguments people make against vaccines, fluorinated water, and N95 masks.

I know this is a bit harsh, but it's important to drive home how your exact argument can be used against drat near anything. Don't even really have to modify it, except switching out "EPA" for the name of some other agency or association as needed. It starts by rejecting literally all expertise and data as too unreliable to pay attention to (except for some scattered rumors on Twitter), proclaims potentially dire consequences if those authorities are trusted, and then uses that as an excuse to reject those authorities' recommendations and instead call for doing whatever suits your gut feeling (often wrapped up in meaningless fluff like "morals and values").

It's so broad and general that it could be applied to drat near anything. Literally any public health measure could be opposed using that argument, and it doesn't even stop at public health. The same argument could fit just as well against welfare or deep-space probes, because when you boil off all the fluff, the core of the argument is just "don't trust the experts, that thing they say is safe might not be safe".

selec posted:

Expertise is not enough. You have to want the same things I want before I can trust you.

Bar Ran Dun posted:

That’s extremely tribal. It’s also extremely narrow and self defeating. It also eliminates critique aimed at one’s self.

selec posted:

If my project is to tear down capitalism and build something better, it is very difficult to find common ground with people slapping bandaids on the murderous brute I’m trying to euthanize.

And yes, it is tribal, that’s another word I guess for class solidarity, but I’ll take it. The people who have enough money to contemplate schemes of regulatory capture and buy senators to do their bidding don’t have my best interests in mind! I don’t think working with them will produce anything positive.

It’s not self-defeating, it’s self-liberating. My project isn’t to create a world where rich people are still comfortable. Why would I help with that kind of project if I’m not rich?

Fritz the Horse posted:

Okay, but terminally online solipsism/nihilism that dismisses any expertise, data, institutions etc that you feel don't agree with your own internal ideology does not actually make for interesting discussion. If you have no interest in good-faith engagement with ideas that conflict with your own, then you should probably stop trying to post in the debate forum.

edit: oh and, the project to euthanize capitalism is not occurring on this forum.