Originally Posted by bmcgowan13 (Post 2357461)

“Mainstream media” will never catch up!

In (another) stroke of brilliance, when Ailes created FOX NEWS he made sure it was on cable-only (not to be confused with FOX Entertainment which airs locally and has the Simpsons, etc.) so FOX NEWS is NOT constrained by the FCC and the Frankfurter (SCOTUS 1943) ruling that allow the federal government to meddle in on-air stations operations.

Frankfurter--“This ruling cleared the way for the FCC to regulate networks indirectly by banning licenses to individual stations that contract with networks engaged in practices considered detrimental to the public interest.“

FOX NEWS is free of the FCC public interest requirements that apply to NBC, ABC, CBS, etc. – the on-air entities. He knew (even back then) that cable was the future. He was a visionary. If you notice on-air talent reports “others are saying” and quote/echo “other” sources. Ailes freed them from the burden to investigate on his dime. Smart man. He was a businessman to the core.

There are five major recognized journalism awards. FOX NEWS has never won an Emmy, Edward R. Murrow, DuPont/Columbia, Peabody or Pulitzer. MTV and Nickelodeon have one each. Roger did not care on bit. He didn’t need them. Why fight for viewers with three other networks (forget CNN—they were newcomers) when you can groom your own loyal audience?

He is comparable to Elon Musk who had the vision, the courage and the money to step up while NASA and Boeing were failing to fill the need.

FOX is commentary/opinion—they do not purport to report news (see Dominion Voting defense) . He packed the programming/commentary with Glen Beck, Megan Kelly, Bill O’Reilly, Gretchen Carlson, Chris Wallace, Jeanine Pirro, Ed Henry, Tucker Carlson, Eric Bolling, and Sean Hannity. All talented audience builders. Ailes never needed it to be a “news” station. He saw a lucrative future while mainstream media was blind During its startup FOX PAID $11 per month to get cable companies to carry the station. (Most providers are compensated for carrying their content) FOX used Rudi Guiliani to step in as the mayor to make Time Warner carry the FOX NEWS channel in NYC. He played hardball and was genius-what companies PAY cable providers to carry THEIR channel. FOX NEWS has exceeded his expectations.

FOX NEWS had revenues exceeding $3B (with a “B”) in the last quarter of 2023. What other venue can come even close to this measure of success?

The so-called main-stream entities are lost in space—they can’t compete with Roger’s genius.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2357489)

Don't forget the surface volcanoes. They are doing there part. Volcanic activity has been a part of Earth's evolution since the world began. Human caused destruction, pollution, deforestation, burning fossil fuel and even wood, mining, etc, is in addition to the Earth's natural heating/cooling cycles. And Human caused changes have been documented and tested and there are direct correlations that prove Human industrial activity exacerbates global warming. The truth is out there. Seek and ye shall find. Or not.

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 2357527)

Humans are but a gnat on the Earth's @ss in the grand scheme of things...

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2357675)

More like ticks that carry diseases, or beetles that can devastate woodlands. Or flea that carries plague. Maybe not an insect, but a single algae that blooms and poisons ocean waters.
Remember, friend, we are the "gnat" that invented the atomic bomb. Over 8 Billion of industrial "gnats" can move mountains and reshape the earth. And, we have. Give your species the credit we deserve.

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 2357867)

To your "devastate woodlands" comment: "The United States has more trees today than we had 100 years ago (and a global study even found that the number of trees on Earth is around 3.04 trillion, a much higher number than previously believed.) The United States is the world's largest consumer (and second largest producer, after Canada) of forest products."

And this Blue Marble will be alive and well long after all humans are nothing but dust...

Originally Posted by tophcfa (Post 2356615)

Reefs close to the shoreline are definitely negatively affected by shoreline development and the associated stuff that winds up in the ocean. However, that doesn’t explain the bleaching of the reefs much further off the shoreline or in areas with little to no development. Close to the shoreline, boats dropping anchor on the reefs is also a major source of damage.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2357886)

Look again, friend. Since 1900 the world has lost forest area the size off the U. S., the same size forest area was lost over the previous 9000 years. Can't see the forest for the lack of trees. Huge swaths of old growth forests, the forests that best produced oxygen, have been laid waste to make room for farms/ranches and plantations like coffee and other poor/low oxygen producers. Yeah, we destroy the good and replace it with poor. If that were the only[/B] damage we did. But it isn't.
Oh, that's right you only site U.S. and Canada, but the problem is a global one. And the state of the Canadian and U.S. forests owes a lot to those tree huggers and the protection and regulations they got passed to replant forests and selective logging to keep the land healthy for regrowth. Left to their own devices, the loggers would have raped the land and left it bare and lifeless. Then you wouldn't have been able to say how great our forests are, cause there wouldn't be any.
As to the Big Blue Marble. Let's hope you are correct about it being well. But wrong about humans turned to dust. Let us hope our species lives long and prospers because we learned our lesson and quit acting blind and arrogant.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2357886)

Look again, friend. Since 1900 the world has lost forest area the size off the U. S., the same size forest area was lost over the previous 9000 years. Can't see the forest for the lack of trees. Huge swaths of old growth forests, the forests that best produced oxygen, have been laid waste to make room for farms/ranches and plantations like coffee and other poor/low oxygen producers. Yeah, we destroy the good and replace it with poor. If that were the only[/B] damage we did. But it isn't.
Oh, that's right you only site U.S. and Canada, but the problem is a global one. And the state of the Canadian and U.S. forests owes a lot to those tree huggers and the protection and regulations they got passed to replant forests and selective logging to keep the land healthy for regrowth. Left to their own devices, the loggers would have raped the land and left it bare and lifeless. Then you wouldn't have been able to say how great our forests are, cause there wouldn't be any.
As to the Big Blue Marble. Let's hope you are correct about it being well. But wrong about humans turned to dust. Let us hope our species lives long and prospers because we learned our lesson and quit acting blind and arrogant.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2358080)

If I tell you a black widow spider about to bite you on the neck, and it really is, that is warning you of something bad. Not fear mongering or hype. Like telling folks to be prepared when a hurricane is headed our way is not fear mongering. Evacuation warnings are not fear mongering, and people ignore the warnings and many end up dead, injured and needing rescue. Some don't, but they gamble with their lives and the lives of others.
As for choosing a Climate "Czar", I would prefer someone who actually understands the situation and would take appropriate action instead of patting us on the back and telling us "Don't worry about a thing. Everything is just fine" when it isn't.

Originally Posted by kkingston57 (Post 2357890)

20 years ago went to the Mendenhall GLacier in Alaska and went back. Personally saw a huge difference. Saw photos in the Visitor Center and their photos showed a huge difference.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725 (Post 2358085)

Our grandkids, great grandkids, and great great grandchildren and their offspring will have to deal with our reckless stupidity of not taking global warming seriously.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2358086)

As expected. But that has absolutely nothing to do with human activity

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2358112)

Actually, it does. Since human activity has played a part in exacerbating/accelerating global warming, we are part of the global warming equation.
If you are unable to comprehend our true level of involvement, just consider human industrialization as the (8,000,000,000) straws that broke the camel's back.

Originally Posted by sounding (Post 2358122)

Making climate claims is fun, but delivering data is the scientific way. So, according to your global warming equation ... how much did "man-made" CO2 warm the earth last year?