Surely even the average climate change denier has to understand the difference between weather and climate, right? If you don't think Trump is either actively malicious or an idiot, then you too are actively malicious or an idiot.
Surely even the average climate lyssenkist has to understand the difference between superstition and science, right? If you don't think politicians on "your" side are also actively malicious or idiots, then you too are actively malicious or an idiot.
-
-
Surely name calling is a great way to advance the debate. Better than trying to understand other people, see where your and their arguments come from and what they break down to. In the end, if you're actively propagating the name calling, then you're a name-calling propagandist.
-
Ok, I’m listening. What’s the argument for “it’s cold now, therefor climate change is fake”?
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t assume any politician is on my side. But to make the “both sides are the same” argument is foolish too. Just because both sides aren’t great doesn’t meant one side isn’t obviously worse.
-
Lots of intelligent people disagree about which side is obviously worse than the other (or whether that is relevant), many of them with cogent arguments. Name calling isn't conducive to anything but rousing feelings of tribalism, which while fun are ultimately counter-productive.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.