Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35

Thread: A perfect example of cognitive dissonance

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    87,043
    Thanks
    35,071
    Thanked 21,785 Times in 17,104 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,344 Times in 2,263 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default A perfect example of cognitive dissonance

    Thanks to goat for posting this powerful scene.



    It is going to be harsh on MAGA Republicans once they realize that none of their people care about them.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to AProudLefty For This Post:

    ThatOwlWoman (10-01-2022)

  3. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,668
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 19,305 Times in 13,426 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 843 Times in 802 Posts

    Default

    That movie piece is bullshit for the most part

    Hexavalent chromium is only a problem if it is present in sufficient quantity to be a problem. The issue and where Brockovich (a ill-informed liar... err, lawyer) gets it wrong is she (in real life) sees pollution issues as an absolute, binary thing. That is, if any amount of pollution is present, it's evil and bad.

    The result is that she (again in RL) will sue--and has made a career out of this--entities over tiny, irrelevant, and often non-verifiable amounts of pollution to get a settlement for cherry picked clients. For all intents, Erin Brockovich is an ambulance chasing POS lawyer that is gaming the system. She know SHIT about the science and environmentalism of the topics she sues on, relying instead on mostly getting those sued to settle without a trial.

    If her targets were to go to trial and fight on the basis of science, Brockovich would likely have lost virtually every case she's brought. She is hardly the only lawyer or law firm that's made a career out of this bullshit either. She's just more of a celebrity.

  4. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    87,043
    Thanks
    35,071
    Thanked 21,785 Times in 17,104 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,344 Times in 2,263 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    That movie piece is bullshit for the most part

    Hexavalent chromium is only a problem if it is present in sufficient quantity to be a problem. The issue and where Brockovich (a ill-informed liar... err, lawyer) gets it wrong is she (in real life) sees pollution issues as an absolute, binary thing. That is, if any amount of pollution is present, it's evil and bad.

    The result is that she (again in RL) will sue--and has made a career out of this--entities over tiny, irrelevant, and often non-verifiable amounts of pollution to get a settlement for cherry picked clients. For all intents, Erin Brockovich is an ambulance chasing POS lawyer that is gaming the system. She know SHIT about the science and environmentalism of the topics she sues on, relying instead on mostly getting those sued to settle without a trial.

    If her targets were to go to trial and fight on the basis of science, Brockovich would likely have lost virtually every case she's brought.
    And yet the victims get millions of dollars.

  5. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,668
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 19,305 Times in 13,426 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 843 Times in 802 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    And yet the victims get millions of dollars.
    Because companies settle because it's cheaper and they can write the loss off. It's all about accounting. They settle, sign an agreement that they can't be sued again over the issue, and write off the loss on taxes. Companies that are willing to fight this bullshit usually demolish people like Brockovich even as it costs them more up front to do it.

  6. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    87,043
    Thanks
    35,071
    Thanked 21,785 Times in 17,104 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,344 Times in 2,263 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Because companies settle because it's cheaper and they can write the loss off. It's all about accounting. They settle, sign an agreement that they can't be sued again over the issue, and write off the loss on taxes. Companies that are willing to fight this bullshit usually demolish people like Brockovich even as it costs them more up front to do it.
    So it was a win for everyone. The Goliath and David scenario.

  7. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,668
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 19,305 Times in 13,426 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 843 Times in 802 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    So it was a win for everyone. The Goliath and David scenario.
    No, it's bad for everyone but the liars... err, lawyers involved. The plantiff(s) get a pittance--particularly in class action lawsuits. The defendant pays a pittance compared to their overall wealth and can't be found libel further, writing off the loss for what amounts to a zero sum end result. And nothing really gets resolved.

    In most cases, the supposed environmental threat / issue was utter and complete bullshit to begin with. With hexavalent chromium it is rarely found, if ever, in amounts above a few parts per billion in drinking water.



    That is, there's next to nothing of it in drinking water. For it to really be dangerous you need 100 to 1000 times what's being found. The same applies for arsenic. You'll die from something else or natural causes before hexavalent chromium will do you in.

    For a comparison you can understand... 1 ppb (part per billion) is about 1/3rd of a person in the US (~330 million). That is, 3 ppb = one person in the entire US. What's your chance of running into that one person in your lifetime? That's a rough analogy to what's being discussed here.
    Last edited by T. A. Gardner; 10-01-2022 at 01:56 AM.

  8. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    87,043
    Thanks
    35,071
    Thanked 21,785 Times in 17,104 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,344 Times in 2,263 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    No, it's bad for everyone but the liars... err, lawyers involved. The plantiff(s) get a pittance--particularly in class action lawsuits. The defendant pays a pittance compared to their overall wealth and can't be found libel further, writing off the loss for what amounts to a zero sum end result. And nothing really gets resolved.

    In most cases, the supposed environmental threat / issue was utter and complete bullshit to begin with. With hexavalent chromium it is rarely found, if ever, in amounts above a few parts per billion in drinking water.



    That is, there's next to nothing of it in drinking water. For it to really be dangerous you need 100 to 1000 times what's being found. The same applies for arsenic. You'll die from something else or natural causes before hexavalent chromium will do you in.
    Is that the same argument you'd use for Flint?

  9. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,597
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    So it was a win for everyone. The Goliath and David scenario.
    how is higher energy costs a win for everyone????
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  10. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    87,043
    Thanks
    35,071
    Thanked 21,785 Times in 17,104 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,344 Times in 2,263 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    how is higher energy costs a win for everyone????
    I thought it was planned for the future?

  11. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,597
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    I thought it was planned for the future?
    planned for? no. expected because of inflation? maybe
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  12. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    72,455
    Thanks
    6,694
    Thanked 12,326 Times in 9,834 Posts
    Groans
    14
    Groaned 511 Times in 484 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Thanks to goat for posting this powerful scene.



    It is going to be harsh on MAGA Republicans once they realize that none of their people care about them.
    which people don't care about whom?

  13. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    87,043
    Thanks
    35,071
    Thanked 21,785 Times in 17,104 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,344 Times in 2,263 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AssHatZombie View Post
    which people don't care about whom?
    The corporations. They only care about the profits.

  14. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    72,455
    Thanks
    6,694
    Thanked 12,326 Times in 9,834 Posts
    Groans
    14
    Groaned 511 Times in 484 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Because companies settle because it's cheaper and they can write the loss off. It's all about accounting. They settle, sign an agreement that they can't be sued again over the issue, and write off the loss on taxes. Companies that are willing to fight this bullshit usually demolish people like Brockovich even as it costs them more up front to do it.
    plus often that shit is poison.

  15. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    72,455
    Thanks
    6,694
    Thanked 12,326 Times in 9,834 Posts
    Groans
    14
    Groaned 511 Times in 484 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    The corporations. They only care about the profits.
    including the ones trying to start a war with russia via false flag attacking nordstream pipeline?

    including the ones on board with klaush schwab's great reset?

  16. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    87,043
    Thanks
    35,071
    Thanked 21,785 Times in 17,104 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,344 Times in 2,263 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AssHatZombie View Post
    including the ones trying to start a war with russia via false flag attacking nordstream pipeline?
    Explain.

Similar Threads

  1. Take the Montreal Cognitive Assessment that Trump took
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-22-2020, 05:50 AM
  2. DO LIBERALS SUFFER FROM COGNITIVE DISSONANCE?????
    By Daddyo in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 358
    Last Post: 02-28-2020, 02:29 PM
  3. more cognitive dissonance from the masses
    By SmarterthanYou in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-22-2016, 12:20 PM
  4. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 02-15-2016, 07:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •