And?

So that’s not your reason for being skeptical of the consensus?

What are your reasons?

Ok.

You do ‘’>

Remove the apostrophe

So it’s the people behind the consensus that you disagree with?

Alright. So what you disagree with is the people and the methods they use to come to that number, is it the actual climate scientists that took party in the survey or the people who made the survey?

Okay, so they have used circular reasoning to justify the conclusion?

Well, we need to take a look at the meta-analysis survey that Cook made. In the third quote, it says:

“a 97% consensus among papers taking a position on the cause of global warming in the peer reviewed literature that humans are responsible.”

It is a misconception that humans are responsible: that is what we call enhanced climate change. Climate change is a natural occurring process, the Earth has been through several glacial and interglacial periods.

We have simply added, because of our use of greenhouse gases.

So you’re not really sceptical of climate change, nor enhanced climate change. Instead you are skeptical of humans being solely responsible for climate change?

Okay. So science is an empirical and falsifiable method that gathers data from observation and makes predictions of what could happen in the future. What climate scientists typically do is, gather the data of amount of carbon being pumped into the atmosphere and then settle on a prediction that at the specified rate, this could cause X, which could lead to Y.

This of courses look at the greenhouse gases from not only human use, but natural use.

So a scientific model is typically made after enormous amounts of data. In this case, it wouldn’t really be a model imo. But I need to brush up on my definition of one. However, climate predictions are more just warnings, saying that if we go at this rate, then this is what will happen.

I don’t know what that is?

Can I see the emails?

This is what I could find in regards to the email controversy.

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/debunking-misinformation-about-stolen-climate-emails?ref=patrick.net

The article says updated 2011

Also, Legates the person who you quoted to have pointed out the misinterpretation in Cook was also caught in controversy.


https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/02/26/uds-david-legates-caught-climate-change-controversy/24090273/

There was also this explaining Legate’s view of Cook’s paper

https://blog.hotwhopper.com/2016/04/the-illogic-of-deniers-david-legates-on.html

What is this degeneracy.

Gaddafi was good.

Based.

Everyone knows this.

His philosophy is very weak.

His fans commit confirmation bias

What can you do lol

@Auspexel Like sh0t said before, ignore his commentary on philosophy and focus on his psychology. That's his expertise since he studies the field of course, I suggest picking up maps of meaning, that book is decent.

Me and Peterson differ greatly, I'm a collectivist whilst he is an individualist, so there isn't anything that I particularly like about him. His understanding of postmodern philosophy and marxism is very bad, as was shown in his debate with Zizek and highlighted in the reddit thread as well.

He definitely is one. He critiques a lot of collectivism on the left. You can also infer it from him being a classical liberal.

Yeah they did.

Why does Israel exist

Can we demolish Israel

Brb gonna go destroy some israelis and refute them with facts and logic

>liking Israel unironically

Smh boomers

:nigel:

No they're not

They're mutts.

Hes right though.

Hitler thought slavs were natural slaves.

And he didn't grant any sort of Aryan rank to the Slavic countries.

Ikr lmao

Indo-Aryans are just Iranians

A deductive argument can have false premises but a true conclusion

Why don't you guys do this in vc.

It's 10x easier in vc.

You economists defend empiricism right this second.

I'll go in vc.

Get in vc right now you cowards

Tf. If you're gonna debate like this do it in vc

Why would I subscribe to an ideology that puts down my own race.

You still don't understand Gentile's fascism.

Sh0t join vc pls

<:peepobad:538084182644228112>

@Jefferson Davis Fuck off. This isn't a shitpost channel

Go into his dms

@angie!!

@Deleted User

@𝚂𝚎𝚗𝚍𝙹𝚘𝚠𝚊

@Stresbal

@𝚂𝚎𝚗𝚍𝙹𝚘𝚠𝚊

@Deleted User

@Deleted User

1. There exist entities that: (i) are members of a causal series; and (ii) begin to exist.
2. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
3. If there is an entity that: (i) is a member of a causal series; and (ii) begins to exist, then there is an uncaused entity X.

This here is for the atheists.

Refute it.

You guys wasted 2-3 hours in text when this could've been finished 30 mins in vc

1) Throttles is a Nazi
2) ?????
3) Therefore Throttles is a Nazi

Nice non-sequitor.

How does that at all entail fascism.

Tell me how fascism entails nazism.

Ba'athists aren't nazis either.

Fallacy of false equivalence.

Sophie, I told you that fascism is the political application of Gentile's actual idealism. Not if you want to go by the canonical definition of the actual philosopher of fascism, is up to you.

Nazi Germany was statist because the state upheld the importance of race (the German people being aryans and such). The state acted as an authority figure for Nazi ideology. Tell me how this relates to Mussolini.

What makes someone a nazi?

Would it be believing in Hitler's fairytale of Germans being aryans?

The SS doesn't exist anymore.

So what makes someone a nazi now?

Hating the Jews?

There are islamic extremists who hate the Jews.

Gentile was in the Nazi party but he himself wasn't a nazi. He didn't think ill of the Jews.

He left the party because of Mussolini.

Conservatism has nothing to do with fascism.

Bruh you know what

Let Fascism be X and let Nazism be Y

1) If X then Y
2) Not Y
3) Therefore, not X (from 2, Modus Tollens)

<:peepok:583236153852035072>

>just chill
>fuck off nazi

I neither like or admire Hitler.

Nor do I subscribe to Nazism.

If you think every school of fascism is nazi, then that's because you're ignorant.

Okay lol.

I don't really care.

You should've said fascist then.

Instead of nazi.

@Sh0t Lol what.

Islamo fascism isn't even a thing

A western concept.

You might be referencing Salafis.

Oh.

The tool to gain power?

It's not the definition of Gentile but I don't have a problem with that imi

Imo*