Over 59607

Headline Politics

Yellow Journalism -

NPR gets headline wrong- twice! -

TAGS: npr headline wrong twice media failure
Rating: 4.33/5

More politifakes by OTC

rebeccaolsen - May 7, 2015, 11:48 am
What's the matter EMMassEnnBeeeCeee? Tucked tail got your tongue?
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 6:48 pm
There are plenty more 'credible' statements like this if you want ME to continue, denier :)
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 6:47 pm
Here is an APPROPRIATE source: An extremely well respected journal, the Proceedings of the Natl.Academy of Science, a***yzed climate change science, and determined that 97-98% of researchers of MMCC supported the tenets of human influenced climate change
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 6:40 pm
Why use data at all, when you have unsubstantiated opinion, to use in it's place? #sarcasmfortheoblivious
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 6:39 pm
I have no doubt you are a steady supply of troll bait. #75957 - A blog (read: opinion LOL).The other - #75959 - by BMJ editor Richard Smith (read:not a climatologist). Neither says what you want it to say: that MMCC is a hoax.You even cherry picked these.
MMessEnnBeeCee - May 6, 2015, 6:30 pm
There are plenty more statements like this if you want me to continue.
MMessEnnBeeCee - May 6, 2015, 6:29 pm
"Peer review tends to have low levels of inter-rater reliability between reviewers" -- http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/the-birth-of-modern-peer-review/
MMessEnnBeeCee - May 6, 2015, 6:27 pm
A systematic review of all the available evidence on peer review concluded that `the practice of peer review is based on faith in its effects, rather than on facts' -- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 5:41 pm
Denier nonsense from an antagonistic denier troll.
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 5:40 pm
Are you finished? :)
MMessEnnBeeCee - May 6, 2015, 5:39 pm
I kind of figured that about you
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 5:37 pm
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 5:37 pm
rebeccaolsen - May 6, 2015, 5:34 pm
I think Faux was being sarcastic :) ts;cr
MMessEnnBeeCee - May 6, 2015, 4:41 pm
also: Peer review in scientific journals a**umes that the article reviewed has been honestly prepared. The process occasionally detects fraud, but is not designed to do so
MMessEnnBeeCee - May 6, 2015, 4:39 pm
You are confusing 97% of "peer reviewed" papers with the number of scientists.
MMessEnnBeeCee - May 6, 2015, 4:38 pm
I think OTC is referring to Politifake as the political parody site.
fauxnews - May 5, 2015, 1:18 pm
Another "parody" of denier logic, OTC?#75914 If not, still best.comedy.ever. X-D
OTC - May 5, 2015, 10:15 am
So you're saying scientists report in the media they're findings?
fauxnews - May 5, 2015, 8:30 am
So, you are saying you were parodying denier logic? :-)
OTC - May 5, 2015, 3:37 am
You mean the links posted on a political parody site?
fauxnews - May 4, 2015, 11:19 pm
P.S. The journalists aren't the ones investigating MMCC. A consensus of approx.97% of SCIENTISTS worldwide investigated MMCC and found it to be unequivocal. You can trust them. Thousands of their studies were peer-reviewed and are the definitive source
fauxnews - May 4, 2015, 11:12 pm
You do realize all those rightwing links you post to challenge MMCC are a form of media too? lol So you trust the media when it reports on something that agrees with your beliefs but selectively distrust it when it disagrees with you? 1L #proudlyobtuse