Message from @Green Syndicalism
Discord ID: 620888165640568832
Lmao how is this even a debate
it isnt
the entire world has accepted the science
its literally just the republican party that has a problem with delusions
I thought the argument was about whether humanity was behind global warming? @Green Syndicalism
i think Silver is just referring to the name of the channel
There is also an argument about the scope. The world ending in 12 years is ridiculous.
Or is it 11 now? It has been a while since she said it.
thats a pretty big strawman
she was referring to the UN's report on climate change
the literal gold standard
which stated that "we only have until 2030 to enact policies to keep global warming to 1.5 degrees by 2050"
Sounds pretty tame in comparison to
So yes, it's not just the "republican party having a problem with delusions". It's democrat doomsayers going too far and receiving a pushback.
Progressives discredit the entire issue when they try to blow it out of proportion.
come on dude
shes clearly exaggerating for rhetorical purposes
anyone who references "12 years" is talking specifically about the IPCC report
which doesn't predict "the end of the world"
(for what its worth, i'm a fan of rhetorical exaggerations on climate change because being moderate clearly hasnt fucking worked to institute the change necessary)
also, just through introspection, i have found the arguments/speeches that affected me the most on climate change weren't the "matter-of-fact" rhetoric i was exposed to, but the more impassioned and probably exaggerated rhetorical points. That doesn't mean i base my opinions on those things, but rather they geared my emotions up in a way that drab autistic appeals wouldn't, and made me more engaged/alert to the climate change issue, far more, as a whole.
No.
Nuke the Icecaps.
Periodt.
now, im a student of mathematics and computer science, so im not a typically emotional person, but if their impassioned appeals can generate emotions in someone with as flat an affect as me, then its bound to be even more effective on normal people
Clevor mans
Goud smort
> shes clearly exaggerating for rhetorical purposes
What can I say, she shouldn't have done it. Neither should she disregard the fact that China, Russia and the muslim world are competing with the US for world dominance.
Uniting them all under the banner of fighting the common threat is a great idea, but you can't use exaggerated threats to do so.
Keep in mind that this rhetoric did not just motivate your research on the matter. It also created rabid lefties and gave a weapon to discredit the entire thing to opposition, no matter how unreasonable and unscientific.
So we have one side having a seizure while the other one is like "just look at them".
> but you can't use exaggerated threats to do so.
sorry bud, but the United States did this with the Soviet Union for 45 years, and it worked *amazingly*
> It also created rabid lefties
these idiots would exist regardless of AOC saying the world is ending in 12 years
AOC has only existed for 1 year, rabid lefties have been around for half a decade
also, the rhetoric AOC is using *was already being used by rabid lefties BEFORE the IPCC report came out*
*the reason politicians started using this rhetoric is because rabid lefties already adopted it long ago and generated grassroots pressure for dems to declare a climate crisis*
so you have the causation the wrong way around
>gave a weapon to discredit the entire thing to opposition
*the opposition's position has become MORE amenable to the science over time, not less*
10 years ago people used to deny global warming itself