Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Brian?

kunst nugget wrote: »

Why would I think that? I wouldn't have that high an opinion of the fellow.

Fair enough.

I thought he was better than that myself. I'm not fan of his but this plus the climate change denial video are a new low.

kunst nugget

Brian? wrote: »

Fair enough.

I thought he was better than that myself. I'm not fan of his but this plus the climate change denial video are a new low.

I wouldn't put that video in anywhere near the same league as the climate change video. Like I said, I loath Tommy Robinson and Sargon and disagree vehemently with their politics but there is a legitimate issue at the heart of it

johnnyskeleton

The big problem with contempt of court proceedings IMO is that they are heard by the Judge in front of whom the contempt occurred.

This makes it far too easy for the Judge to assume that since he/she observed what happened that everyone else knew it too.

The problem is that contempt proceedings would be unworkable if they had to go before another Judge and the first Judge had to give evidence of the contempt.

I also have concerns about how contempt procedures can be used to punish as well as to enforce compliance or prevent a breach of a court order.

However, all of these issues pass muster in the Irish courts where we do have a written constitution with very specific fair trial requirements, not least of which is a right to trial by jury for a non minor offence.

At the same time, the issue for the defendant in this case seemed very clear. The court of appeals view that he didnt have sufficient time to prepare his defence in respect of the second charge but was sufficiently prepared in respect of the hearing to activate his previous 3 month suspended sentence. Seems somewhat at odds really, since the triggering action of thr suspended sentence and the new offence were thr same thing.

Akrasia

Brian? wrote: »

The term “dog whistle” has been around a lot longer than boards.ie . It’s an accurate term for the nudge, nudge, wink, wink support that Trump gives to the alt right. It’s also pretty accurate here. Why would Peterson share a video if he didn’t agree with the content?

It’s the same carry on with the climate change denial video. Why share if you don’t agree?

Exactly. Plausible deniability. Its not exactly sophisticated, its why the mob say 'take care of business' instead of 'kill that guy'

If Peterson says Tommy Robinson shouldn't be in Jail it's politically damaging to him. But if he retweets someone else saying the exact same thing he gets to say he doesn't support everything in the video, and pick and choose what parts to defend while at the same time strongly signalling that Tommy Robinson shouldn't be in jail (and you shouldn't be concerned about climate change)

JRant

Brian? wrote: »

That's quite the mixed metaphor.

It is obvious to me what his tweet was about. Feeding content to his followers. Stoking their outrage without overtly endorsing the content of the video, so he could deny supporting Tommy Robinson later.

Then you are obviously wrong, not that I care either way.

silverharp

kunst nugget wrote: »

I wouldn't put that video in anywhere near the same league as the climate change video. Like I said, I loath Tommy Robinson and Sargon and disagree vehemently with their politics but there is a legitimate issue at the heart of it

why do you loath Sargon and his politics? he paints himself and comes across as left of centre, the far right hate him as much as the far left.

Subcomandante Marcos

RandomName2 wrote: »

Just as a side note, agriculture predominantly produces methane rather than CO2, but methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas.

No.it doesn't. Methane emissions are less than 43% of the total Co2 equivalent emissions of the agricultural sector, it's a measure of impact, not volume, methane a being 25x more potent GHG than Co2, so in terms of tonnage it's a much smaller number.

The main sources of emissions in agriculture are soils and land use management. Co2 loss from tillage, exposure, desertification, over cropping, and over use of fertilizer (N20 being 298x more potent than Co2) are the main causes of emissions in the agricultural sector.

If you bring forestry and other land use being into the agricultural realm (as most studies tend to, AFOLU being the common acrunom for the entire sector) then the Co2 equivalent % of drops even further.

By the way adding garlic to the diets of large ruminants won't do anything besides keeping them safe from vampires. The near decade old headline you read on some news paper was based on. A flawed study. In cattle allicin proved to not reduce methane emissions significantly, changed the colour, taste and smell of milk and was not viable. It did help control fly numbers weirdly enough.

Addition of certain seaweeds may help reduce methane production in large ruminants by up to 90%, but the levels needed (10% of total feed) make it unviable at present, and it might effect milk quality. Apparently there's a compound in the specific seaweed varieties that inhibits an enzyme in the digestive process of cows which reduces the inneffency of grass digestion, meaning less menthane burps.

kubjones

Brian? wrote: »

That's quite the mixed metaphor.

It is obvious to me what his tweet was about. Feeding content to his followers. Stoking their outrage without overtly endorsing the content of the video, so he could deny supporting Tommy Robinson later.

The problem is that you're putting motive to what he said, when really he didn't say anything endorsing anything other than Sargon's opinions in the video.

Sargon isn't "Far-Right".

Its fine that this is your opinion but nothing about what you're painting him to be is "obvious".

Akrasia

kunst nugget wrote: »

They actually have a right to be outraged in this instance. I find them loathsome people but I think it does no one any good to agree with a shítty practice when it's used against someone you disagree with. As in your example, you never know when that shítty practice can be turned around and used on you.

When you plead guilty of contempt of court and get a suspended sentence, and then a year later plead guilty to contempt of court again and get a custodial sentence, you don't really have much to complain about. Jordan Peterson loves saying that actions have consequences. If you don't want to go to jail, don't breach a court order while already serving a suspended sentence for contempt of court

alaimacerc

Brian? wrote: »

Are you redefining the word precise? There is absolutely nothing precise about his comment when sharing that video.

Given the JP himself is apparently keen on redefining the word "truth", doing so with "precise" is surely a small matter indeed.

Yes, "be precise" is one of his rules. What we're missing is any actual evidence is that he follows it himself.

Then again, given that we're in a world where large numbers of people believe Trump to be the authority on what is or isn't "fake news"...

Akrasia

kunst nugget wrote: »

Is there not the same irony if you believe in the notion of due process but in the case of someone like Tommy Robinson you think 'Well, it's good enough for him!'

What's the due process for a criminal who commits another crime and pleads guilty while on a suspended sentence?

How many times has there been outrage over criminals committing more crimes while out on bail or early release?

Tommy Robinson has proven that he will put trials at risk of collapse just to increase his own social media profile. He has nothing to complain about

Brian?

kubjones wrote: »

The problem is that you're putting motive to what he said, when really he didn't say anything endorsing anything other than Sargon's opinions in the video.

Sargon isn't "Far-Right".

Its fine that this is your opinion but nothing about what you're painting him to be is "obvious".

He didn't endorse the opinions contained in the video? While sharing said video without any criticism in the comments. Smells like an endorsement with plausible deniability built in. It's entirely consistent with his modus operandi.

alaimacerc

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I think anyone who isn't alt-right-phobic can see what he's saying

"Anyone who isn't alt-right-phobic"? Language being subjected to cruel and unusual treatment right there, I think. To reclaim Orwell's good name from the rightists, strong shades of "Politics and the English Language" here.

alaimacerc

Brian? wrote: »

He didn't endorse the opinions contained in the video? While sharing said video without any criticism in the comments. Smells like an endorsement with plausible deniability built in. It's entirely consistent with his modus operandi.

Deniability doesn't seem to need to be very plausible these days. Deny, deflect, defend.

DickSwiveller Returns

alaimacerc wrote: »

"Anyone who isn't alt-right-phobic"? Language being subjected to cruel and unusual treatment right there, I think. To reclaim Orwell's good name from the rightists, strong shades of "Politics and the English Language" here.

I'm making the simple point that he's reading too much in to a tweet. Wasn't Brian defending Sarah Jeong recently, saying he doesn't pay much credence to tweets?

kubjones

Brian? wrote: »

He didn't endorse the opinions contained in the video? While sharing said video without any criticism in the comments. Smells like an endorsement with plausible deniability built in. It's entirely consistent with his modus operandi.

A good way to operate, BUT STILL no evidence exists that he agrees with what Tommy Robinson does.

And even if he did, so what?
I'm fairly sure I disagree with you on most things but I'd still love to hear you speak about whatever you specialize in.

Unless of course you're a furry. Then I don't think there is any common ground here. :pac:

alaimacerc

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I'm making the simple point that he's reading too much in to a tweet. Wasn't Brian defending Sarah Jeong recently, saying he doesn't pay much credence to tweets?

No, you're waterboarding words to seek to imply that anyone not nodding along with a right-wing agenda is some sort of mentally ill Marxist.

DickSwiveller Returns

alaimacerc wrote: »

No, you're waterboarding words to seek to imply that anyone not nodding along with a right-wing agenda is some sort of mentally ill Marxist.

Right.

alaimacerc

kubjones wrote: »

A good way to operate, BUT STILL no evidence exists that he agrees with what Tommy Robinson does.

And even if he did, so what?

There's a pretty clear statement of debating intent, I suppose.

I'm going to flatly deny all evidence put to me.

Once that's no longer possible, I'm just going to shrug off the conclusion we were supposedly discussing in the first place.

kunst nugget

Akrasia wrote: »

When you plead guilty of contempt of court and get a suspended sentence, and then a year later plead guilty to contempt of court again and get a custodial sentence, you don't really have much to complain about. Jordan Peterson loves saying that actions have consequences. If you don't want to go to jail, don't breach a court order while already serving a suspended sentence for contempt of court

So you have no problem with someone being arrested, charged and sentenced all within 5 hours? That's a Judge Dredd style justice system right there. I'm not doubting the guy's guilt in this, I just think any justice system that can operate like that is open to a lot of abuse.

PlaneSpeeking

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I'm making the simple point that he's reading too much in to a tweet. Wasn't Brian defending Sarah Jeong recently, saying he doesn't pay much credence to tweets?

Yes he was but I believe that was argued as satire.

kubjones

alaimacerc wrote: »

There's a pretty clear statement of debating intent, I suppose.

I'm going to flatly deny all evidence put to me.

Once that's no longer possible, I'm just going to shrug off the conclusion we were supposedly discussing in the first place.

You don't have any evidence to the contrary, so don't pretend you have won any kind of victory with your baseless accusations.

Example: Kanye West doesn't belong in politics and despite this, he is an actual musical genius. And this isn't an opinion, upon a deeper understanding of music theory it cannot be denied that his music has been revolutionary.

JRant

Akrasia wrote: »

What? He admitted to being in contempt of court. He breached a court order. He was already on a suspended sentence for a previous contempt of court charge.

Newsflash, when you're on a suspended sentence and you commit another crime, that sentence stops being suspended and you go to jail.

The irony is that the vast majority of his supporters constantly whinge about immigrants committing crimes when they're 'not supposed to be here' and most of them are 'tough on crime' except when it doesn't suit them

Did he? That would be news to a lot of people if true. I'm sure you can back that claim up with a source or two.

When accused of committing a crime you are entitled to due process or does that not apply to people you don't like?

Even those child rapist gangs get due process.

PlaneSpeeking

JRant wrote: »

Did he? That would be news to a lot of people if true. I'm sure you can back that claim up with a source or two.

When accused of committing a crime you are entitled to due process or does that not apply to people you don't like?

Even those child rapist gangs get due process.

Eventually, after years of operating with impunity lest the authorities be seen as racist.

kunst nugget

silverharp wrote: »

why do you loath Sargon and his politics? he paints himself and comes across as left of centre, the far right hate him as much as the far left.

He paints himself as a classical liberal, but he's a reactionary who panders to the right wing whilst railing against 'SJWs' and 'cultural marxism' and ODing on conspiracy theories delivered with a sneer that would make Ian O’Doherty weep with joy. I find the guy and his videos insufferable and have done since I first heard about him around the beginning of all that gamergate nonsense. That video of Tommy Robinson was an endurance test for me.

alaimacerc

JRant wrote: »

Did he? That would be news to a lot of people if true.

Doubtless, as the JP and TR confirmation bubbles both seem pretty intense.

I'm sure you can back that claim up with a source or two.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=tommy+robinson+pleaded+guilty+contempt+of+court

Brian?

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I'm making the simple point that he's reading too much in to a tweet. Wasn't Brian defending Sarah Jeong recently, saying he doesn't pay much credence to tweets?

I said tweets in isolation.

I said I'd verify the tweets by checking non Twitter output. In the case of Peterson, there is plenty to verify my opinion.

Giraffe Box

kunst nugget wrote: »

He paints himself as a classical liberal, but he's a reactionary who panders to the right wing whilst railing against 'SJWs' and 'cultural marxism' and ODing on conspiracy theories delivered with a sneer that would make Ian O’Doherty weep with joy. I find the guy and his videos insufferable and have done since I first heard about him around the beginning of all that gamergate nonsense. That video of Tommy Robinson was an endurance test for me.

I agree with the above, but had to 'google' Ian O'Doherty, maybe I should get out more, or stay in more perhaps.

alaimacerc

kubjones wrote: »

You don't have any evidence to the contrary, so don't pretend you have won any kind of victory with your baseless accusations.

I think you're continuing to confuse "no evidence" and "jury nullification" -- having first appointed yourself and a couple of other serial JP-apologists as the jury.

And worst, "victory" and "this is why we can't have nice things".

Example: Kanye West doesn't belong in politics and despite this, he is an actual musical genius. And this isn't an opinion, upon a deeper understanding of music theory it cannot be denied that his music has been revolutionary.

Eh? Have you lost all track of your own train of thought?

Brian?

kubjones wrote: »

A good way to operate, BUT STILL no evidence exists that he agrees with what Tommy Robinson does.

And no evidence he doesn't. It's a nice grey space to occupy.

And even if he did, so what?
I'm fairly sure I disagree with you on most things but I'd still love to hear you speak about whatever you specialize in.

Unless of course you're a furry. Then I don't think there is any common ground here. :pac:

Semiconductor manufacturing. I do a very fine line in device physics and the future of quantum computing. No one seems to want to listen in the pub though.