Quote:
Originally Posted by P-hack
S'ok, I was making a different point than the one you went on about.
Back to the subject of emotional manipulation, well more like terrorism, I liken the "thermal runaway" argument to threatening people with eternal damnation if they don't agree with you or the importance of what you are saying. It needs to stop. Economic arguments are best for implementing change, and renewable make the most sense long term, so that is our common ground I guess. People have heard the warnings about sea rise in plenty of time (no I don't have much sympathy for you if you still live in new Orleans).
If you prefer wildlife, then you have to understand that humans compete with wildlife. Look at a satellite picture of the states sometime, almost completely covered in unsustainable farms for an ever unsustainable population, creating lots of heat in the process.
|
First of all "terrorism" has a definition: the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
Warning somebody about a danger you see is not terrorism, and pretending it is, is both dishonest and insulting. Stop that.
We warn about dangers because the dangers are real. The presence of feedback loops is not under dispute, it's basic physics. If you warm the planet, certain things WILL happen, and some of them will cause more warming. For that to NOT happen would be counter to everything we know about how the physical world works.
Saying "there's a tiger behind you" isn't alarmism any more than saying "if you're living in New Orleans right now, you're probably going to get flooded again".
You seem to be under the impression that nobody TRIED the dispassionate approach. It's been over fifty years since the first warnings about climate change, and EVERY approach has been tried.
You know what the result has been? No action, millions of dollars spent misleading the public, and now people are saying "you didn't do a good enough job convincing us", while simultaneously accusing people talking about of TERRORISM?
I call bull.