133

Average big oil worshipper (hexbear.net)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 45 comments

sorted by: hot top new old

[-] [email protected] 109 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Sabine Karin Doris Hossenfelder (born 18 September 1976)

In July 1977, a senior scientist of Exxon, James Black reported to the company's executives that there was a general scientific agreement at that time that the burning of fossil fuels was the most likely manner in which mankind was influencing global climate change.

Exxon's research confirming the existence of manmade climate change is almost as old as you are.

[-] [email protected] 27 points 11 months ago

fossil fuels was the most likely manner in which mankind was influencing global climate change.

flowey-smug it says it right there: man influenced climate change!

[-] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago

Ive seen articles from the early 20th c detailing a rudimentary understanding of greenhouse effects from carbon dioxide lol

[-] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Svante Arrhenius figured this shit out in 1898

[-] [email protected] 67 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This woman went from funny science youtube to absolute yikes-1 yikes-2 yikes-3

[-] [email protected] 17 points 11 months ago

Fortunately there's a new funny science youtube who also seems to have at least decent if not verging on pretty good politics.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

I adore this channel.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

angela rocks!

[-] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago

Isn't her main science take that MOND is the only sensible theory of dark matter?

[-] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago

No idea, I didn't see this one

However I remember her making a whole video about being skeptical of nuclear fusion, which made sense for me at the time except now we're seeing so much progress in that field I'm wondering if she could be also wrong about this lol

[-] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

From when I still watched her, Superdeterminism seemed to be her thing. Its a non-theory, totally unprovable. I don't think she's a MOND believer, could be wrong though but either way she's not a cosmologist.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

She is truly awful, her take in her own field is extremely dumb but it’s her takes in other fields that are even worse. Like a lot of science YouTubers she doesn’t stay in her lane, she thinks the fact someone gave her a phd for her ridiculous idea of superdeterminism gives her license to opine about other field she knows fuck all about.

If you can find any video of hers from a field you have first hand knowledge about her takes are wrong, and not just wrong, but that special kind of wrong where you completely misunderstand the basics of something and then extrapolate out from there the stupidest fucking conclusions imaginable.

[-] [email protected] 33 points 11 months ago

This woman keeps getting worse with each post

[-] [email protected] 32 points 11 months ago

Next video probably going to be about how CRT is "scientificly" ruining Christmas.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago

Black Santa?! In my South! sicko-hexbear-woke

[-] [email protected] 29 points 11 months ago

Watch the video. The headline claim is that oil companies would never have stopped selling oil and the public would never have stopped buying it no matter how much information was out there - it does not actually deny that oil companies knew about climate change very early on. Less than a minute into the video Sabine starts blaming oil companies for climate change denial misinformation. It's just a clickbait title.

[-] [email protected] 25 points 11 months ago

The headline claim is that oil companies would never have stopped selling oil and the public would never have stopped buying it no matter

the public would never have stopped buying

no matter how much information was out there

clickbait title.

thirty episodes of the-podcast in the gulag for you

[-] [email protected] 24 points 11 months ago

I disliked her for promoting super determinism. It's a real theory, but a frankly ridiculous one.

Now I can dislike her for promoting capitalism too.

[-] [email protected] 25 points 11 months ago

She also had some awful takes on trans people and autistic people too

[+] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

[deleted]

[-] [email protected] 14 points 11 months ago

wtf is super determinism too

It just means that every minute decision you make was predetermined by various material factors. I.E. the reason you make the decision you do is because your brain was in a state which was determined by various material factors. Those material factors were predetermined by other material factors so on and so forth. It's mostly used as a way to get around seemingly faster-than-light information sharing in quantum physics.

If you run a physics simulation with the exact same parameters then it should have the exact same results right? Super Determinism postulates that the universe operates in a similar way. That if you could simulate the entire universe and it started out exactly the same, then the simulated universe and the current universe would be identical.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

No no this is plain WRONG :( These “super determinists” need to read Gramsci and understand that the subject IS NOT a slave!!

[-] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

No offense, but there's a big difference between economic determinism and physical determinism. Gramsci was writing about humans in a sociological context, not sub atomic particles and quantum mechanics. They do not contradict the other. Unless you mean to imply that particles behave like human beings for some reason.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

From the comment I responded to:

It just means that every minute decision you make was predetermined by various material factors. I.E. the reason you make the decision you do is because your brain was in a state which was determined by various material factors. Those material factors were predetermined by other material factors so on and so forth.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Not really sure why people think so poorly of physical determinism. Why do people think that if the universe were to be put into the same state twice then we would get two different 'histories' of its states from that point on?

[-] [email protected] 22 points 11 months ago

My heckin' exxon mobile is just a smol innocent bean pls no bully

[-] [email protected] 17 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

someone needs ludovigo technique, but with the-podcast

dipshit

[-] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago

Trust in science

the science:

germany-cool

[-] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago

Exxon literally knew since the fucking 70s and that didn’t stop them from paying for fake studies and propaganda campaigns against climate change activists

[-] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago

Imagine being so fucking shameless and immoral that you go absolutely against all the scientific data despite being a scientist during a world changing crisis. She is 100% getting paid for this directly or indirectly from the oil industry.

Add her to the list of people to send to live in the worst affected coastal region in 50 years barbara-pit

[-] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago

sentient oil theory

[-] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

this is going to be cosmic horror isn't it?

[-] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

look around you

[-] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

i don't wanna

[-] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

I followed her channel for quite a while before I noticed her veering to the right to "burn the poors for big oil."

Her takes on dark matter also seem...off to me. Idk how to place it w/o a background in the subject though.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago

She's a failed academic who switched careers to youtube grifting, so yeah she's probably wrong about everything physics-related.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

Sabine has some good takes and highly dubious takes, watch with a pinch of salt. And bullshit, they knew then; hell, they know now and they're still fighting climate change action tooth and nail.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

SMDH my dick head, they got Sabine with the CIA YouTube clickbait title gun. And the CIA shitty takes gun set to three-round burst mode, multiple times now. They're using her for target practice at this point.

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024

133 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15989 readers

2 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]