Those now talking about climate change all the time are the same ones saying it is opportunistic to criticise Islam when there is a terror attack
Hypocrites.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
sogdianrock · 61-69, M
hi Cierzo
Attacking Islam when there is a terror attack would have been like attacking The Pope when the IRA let a bomb off. Plainly the two are sets which overlap no more.
I do not think anyone would say it is opportunistic to criticise Islam so much as wrong.
The game plan of terrorism is to achieve exactly what you advocate.
Climate change discussion is not the problem - climate change denial is.
There is no hypocrisy here other than your own in setting up false positions which you attribute and then ridicule when they are nothing but your own creation.
Best wishes
:)
Attacking Islam when there is a terror attack would have been like attacking The Pope when the IRA let a bomb off. Plainly the two are sets which overlap no more.
I do not think anyone would say it is opportunistic to criticise Islam so much as wrong.
The game plan of terrorism is to achieve exactly what you advocate.
Climate change discussion is not the problem - climate change denial is.
There is no hypocrisy here other than your own in setting up false positions which you attribute and then ridicule when they are nothing but your own creation.
Best wishes
:)
CopperCicada · M
@sogdianrock 🍿
Cierzo · M
@sogdianrock Climate change denial is sn opinion. If you are totalitarian and do not accept it, it is your problem.
sogdianrock · 61-69, M
hi Cierzo ·
haha denial is not a position. Saying science is a conspiracy is not a position.
Here we are out in the open and judged by SW opinion. I rely on their good sense to smell bullshit when it is presented to them.
Best wishes
:)
haha denial is not a position. Saying science is a conspiracy is not a position.
Here we are out in the open and judged by SW opinion. I rely on their good sense to smell bullshit when it is presented to them.
Best wishes
:)
CopperCicada · M
@Cierzo as a scientist, i have a hard time calling the denial of science an "opinion". by definition "opinions" are judgments that are not based on fact or knowledge. like my "opinion" that very strong personality women with dark hair are attractive. that is not based on fact or knowledge. climate science stands and falls on the basis of scientific method. which places it outside "opinion".
Cierzo · M
@CopperCicada Since science has become an instrument for politicians, certain theories are funded and voiced, and other are silenced, scientific truth is dead.
Cierzo · M
@sogdianrock See my answer below.
Cierzo · M
@sogdianrock You rely on the good sense of people when they agree with you. You are a selective believer in democracy.
CopperCicada · M
@Cierzo that is a naive type of skepticism. your argument is that since there is a political influence on science then all science is null and void. an alternative approach is to ascertain which science is tainted by corporate or political influence and that which is not. it's not difficult to ascertain actually.
it is also something of a chicken and the egg argument. the purpose of basic science research is to inform public policy, and public policy subsequently funds research that has a huge impact on public good.
it is also a matter of chicken and the egg in terms of political support offered by scientists. scientists tend to support whoever supports basic science, education, tech transfer, and so on. the america at least basic science is grossly underfunded given the size of our economy, and many scientists end up supporting democrats who under support these things, but more than republicans.
it is also something of a chicken and the egg argument. the purpose of basic science research is to inform public policy, and public policy subsequently funds research that has a huge impact on public good.
it is also a matter of chicken and the egg in terms of political support offered by scientists. scientists tend to support whoever supports basic science, education, tech transfer, and so on. the america at least basic science is grossly underfunded given the size of our economy, and many scientists end up supporting democrats who under support these things, but more than republicans.
Cierzo · M
@CopperCicada I don't say all science is null. What I say is that I cannot take any scientific declaration like the whole truth when I know that certain opinions are broadly issued, and certain ones are censored.
CopperCicada · M
@Cierzo i guess as somebody trained as a scientist i have a different attitude towards science, be it climate change or whatever. i don't do science through the mainstream media. i don't listen to nye or degrasse-tyson. i don't do blogs or youtube videos. i read papers and talk to the people who write them and take the attitude "i'm from missouri you'll have to show me." anyone can do that. there's no special club.