▲ 984 ▼ [OC] Unexpected ally 🤷 (sh.itjust.works) submitted 3 years ago by Wats0ns@sh.itjust.works to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world 53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Emi621@lemmy.blahaj.zone 38 points 3 years ago (3 children) Or that it's not man made. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] ChapolinColoradoNZ@lemmy.world 47 points 3 years ago (1 child) Even if it wasn't human made, if we can do something about it and help ourselves out of it as a result, why shouldn't we? It's crazy that this is even an argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 11 points 3 years ago* Because also "nature will take care of itself." Yep, just like my body takes care of itself with fever and such when something multiplies too much and dumps its waste in me. Burn it out and flush it out, that's just "nature taking care of itself." permalink fedilink source parent [+] bela@lemm.ee 21 points 3 years ago* (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Khalic@kbin.social 23 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) I had to refute this argument... IRL... it was a sad day... just tell them the person who launched this nonsense has oil and coal industry ties EDIT: more on the subject, links to actual study inside the article: https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/01/to-fight-climate-misinformation-point-to-the-man-behind-the-curtain/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) I thought the comment you were replying to was sarcastic… but you never know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Khalic@kbin.social 0 points 3 years ago That's what I figured, but now you're making me doubt... ugh stupid timeline I was just sharing a strategy that sometimes works with this kind of dumb argument. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 16 points 3 years ago (1 child) William Jennings Bryant represented a case back in the 20s or 30s about the potential harm of anthropogenic global warming (now called climate change to try to meet science deniers in places getting cold due to changes in currents and jetstreams where they are). The science was known in the late 1800s. The exact science was known in the 1950s. The failure to act on that information is thanks in large part to corruption and greed. Anytime you hear "the science isn't out yet" or "they didn't use the narrow definition of the scientific method I learned in middle school in Nebraska involving a very specific structure of lab based experiment so climate science isn't real science" you are hearing the output of nearly 80 years of not wanting to do anything about it because it would put this quarters profits at risk permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In the 1950's at least they could tell themselves their kids had time to fix it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago And nuclear power was seemingly the future, the oil companies bear the vast majority of the blame but Chernobyl certainly didn’t help our current situation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ChapolinColoradoNZ@lemmy.world 47 points 3 years ago (1 child) Even if it wasn't human made, if we can do something about it and help ourselves out of it as a result, why shouldn't we? It's crazy that this is even an argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 11 points 3 years ago* Because also "nature will take care of itself." Yep, just like my body takes care of itself with fever and such when something multiplies too much and dumps its waste in me. Burn it out and flush it out, that's just "nature taking care of itself." permalink fedilink source parent
[–] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 11 points 3 years ago* Because also "nature will take care of itself." Yep, just like my body takes care of itself with fever and such when something multiplies too much and dumps its waste in me. Burn it out and flush it out, that's just "nature taking care of itself." permalink fedilink source parent
[+] bela@lemm.ee 21 points 3 years ago* (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Khalic@kbin.social 23 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) I had to refute this argument... IRL... it was a sad day... just tell them the person who launched this nonsense has oil and coal industry ties EDIT: more on the subject, links to actual study inside the article: https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/01/to-fight-climate-misinformation-point-to-the-man-behind-the-curtain/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) I thought the comment you were replying to was sarcastic… but you never know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Khalic@kbin.social 0 points 3 years ago That's what I figured, but now you're making me doubt... ugh stupid timeline I was just sharing a strategy that sometimes works with this kind of dumb argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Khalic@kbin.social 23 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) I had to refute this argument... IRL... it was a sad day... just tell them the person who launched this nonsense has oil and coal industry ties EDIT: more on the subject, links to actual study inside the article: https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/01/to-fight-climate-misinformation-point-to-the-man-behind-the-curtain/ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) I thought the comment you were replying to was sarcastic… but you never know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Khalic@kbin.social 0 points 3 years ago That's what I figured, but now you're making me doubt... ugh stupid timeline I was just sharing a strategy that sometimes works with this kind of dumb argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) I thought the comment you were replying to was sarcastic… but you never know. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Khalic@kbin.social 0 points 3 years ago That's what I figured, but now you're making me doubt... ugh stupid timeline I was just sharing a strategy that sometimes works with this kind of dumb argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Khalic@kbin.social 0 points 3 years ago That's what I figured, but now you're making me doubt... ugh stupid timeline I was just sharing a strategy that sometimes works with this kind of dumb argument. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 16 points 3 years ago (1 child) William Jennings Bryant represented a case back in the 20s or 30s about the potential harm of anthropogenic global warming (now called climate change to try to meet science deniers in places getting cold due to changes in currents and jetstreams where they are). The science was known in the late 1800s. The exact science was known in the 1950s. The failure to act on that information is thanks in large part to corruption and greed. Anytime you hear "the science isn't out yet" or "they didn't use the narrow definition of the scientific method I learned in middle school in Nebraska involving a very specific structure of lab based experiment so climate science isn't real science" you are hearing the output of nearly 80 years of not wanting to do anything about it because it would put this quarters profits at risk permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In the 1950's at least they could tell themselves their kids had time to fix it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago And nuclear power was seemingly the future, the oil companies bear the vast majority of the blame but Chernobyl certainly didn’t help our current situation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In the 1950's at least they could tell themselves their kids had time to fix it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago And nuclear power was seemingly the future, the oil companies bear the vast majority of the blame but Chernobyl certainly didn’t help our current situation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago And nuclear power was seemingly the future, the oil companies bear the vast majority of the blame but Chernobyl certainly didn’t help our current situation. permalink fedilink source parent