this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2025
-3 points (40.0% liked)
Shows and TV
1187 readers
309 users here now
Open discussion of Media / Shows / Television
- Be nice
- Don't go off topic
- Don't rage farm
Other communities
We are still open to mod application, please comment on this post: https://lemm.ee/post/40675177
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Having watched the show, they didn't deny climate change in season 1. They talked about the lack of better options when comparing total carbon cost for the various alternatives.
Not to mention the scene where they use a windfarm to power the pumpjacks in a rural area.
I overall enjoyed the story and the acting, but nearly every episode had some formulaic monologue where Thornton or Hamm explained some anti-climate change BS to a character that was portrayed as incompetent for believing in it. It's the same formula used in all these types of shows where some Tough Man™ is always correct in every situation and any character who happens to believe in science or data, is a woman or PoC is treated like a bumbling fool. Reacher is another good example of this.
"lack of better options" IS propaganda my friend. They're saying there is some line in the sand where they will acknowledge that green energy is better, without ever saying it.
It's a common excuse, that green energy isn't perfect it must be bad. It doesn't matter that it removes 80% of the emissions, it's 100% or nothing, that's the standard they set. No options will ever be perfect, so they can keep people thinking that it's moral to keep using oil. It's not.
Not to mention that the "facts" they tout in the series are just plain wrong.
Great point