By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Not wasting any time, indeed: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/20/paris-climate-accord-joe-biden-returns-us

Good to see the US taking action on climate and the environment once again.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Around the Network

So the MAGA crowd are taking it well, jeez



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

curl-6 said:

Not wasting any time, indeed: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/20/paris-climate-accord-joe-biden-returns-us

Good to see the US taking action on climate and the environment once again.

It is great, even the Australian Government feels pressured to pull it's environmental socks up now there is a different sheriff in town 



As an American, if you are an American, if you cannot look at an American, with whatever their origin, as a fellow American with love and respect, if they at least look at you with respect and love, then I don't want you as a fellow American. We can have differences of opinion, we cannot have differences of humanity.

If you are beyond that, if you have so much hate and disrespect, then frankly I don't want you. I don't want you in any aspect of what you are. You need not exist. I would treat you as if you did not exist. Who are you? Nothing.



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of their first breath to the moment of their last.



curl-6 said:

So the MAGA crowd are taking it well, jeez

To quote those people Ben Shapiro: Facts don't care about your feelings!



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
curl-6 said:

So the MAGA crowd are taking it well, jeez

To quote those people Ben Shapiro: Facts don't care about your feelings!

Too bad Shapiro is a piece of shit who'd probably be right there with them. 



These fanatical Trumpists are going nuts. It's like watching the second half of Der Untergang.



Runa216 said:
Machiavellian said:

Actually is very easy.  For every ounce of information that says one thing, there is something else that has a counter.  Having friends that are very big Trump supporters and still are, I have seen and heard their reasoning.  I have gone to the web sites where they get their information and I have listened to the people they trust.  The thing about information is that its abundant and you can always find information that support your bias.  This just isn't isolated to just Trump supporters but people in general.  So the thing is, if you believe a certain way, if you think a certain way, you will definitely find someone who also believe and think the same thing or who is willing to use your bias for their own gain.  A lot of times you do not even know you are being marketed to when you read some story but you are.  Most news is heavily bias, where opinions are filed in with bits and pieces of information that may be true or twisted to support said person opinion.

Case in point would be someone like Ted Cruz.  Being a lawyer with the chops he has, he very much understands how the law works.  Think about the things he has said in favor of supporting the claims made by the President on Fraud and how he words his speech.  He has probably paid attention to every case but since he knows his words are designed to reach people who will not question what he says because he speaks to their bias, he leads them on with that false sense that he believe in their cause knowing its a joke.  Most politicians work like this and pretty much how marketing works.

The issue is never about how much information out there that people can use, its what they consider as information while tossing anything out that does not conform to their bias.

Except that's not true at all. This nonsense ideal that both sides should be equally represented is a farce, one meant to not ruffle feathers rather than come to the truth of reality. Take the Climate Change discussion and debate...which in the eyes of the scientific community is NOT a debate at all. Yet, when people are debating it, the sides are presented as equal when in reality it's like 49:1 in favour of 'climate change is real and influenced by us'. But if a site or show allows 98% of the time to go to one side, they come across as biased even though...you know...that's what the consensus agrees upon by a rather wide margin. 

This is false equivalency. Not reality. 

Not sure why you came to the conclusion from my post that both sides should be equally represented.  Instead I am saying that if you are trying to reach the other side and all you do is say facts are on your side then that probably not going to cut it.  Anyone can find their own facts or find information that counter what you believe is facts.  Case in point would be COVID.  We have multiple doctors that have viewpoints all over the place concerning the virus, how to combat it and what works and what does not.  At the moment one person fact may be disproven or updated depending on new data that comes in.

Using Climate Change their are still many scientist who do not go along with the majority.  Just because its a majority doesn't mean they are all correct and their may be points being withheld that counters to their opinion whether educated or not.  Even data can be viewed in different ways if not represented by actual occurrences.  Here is a link on the Pros and Cons on the subject but the main thing to understand is that anyone can find data that supports their viewpoint.  

https://climatechange.procon.org/



Machiavellian said:

Not sure why you came to the conclusion from my post that both sides should be equally represented.  Instead I am saying that if you are trying to reach the other side and all you do is say facts are on your side then that probably not going to cut it.  Anyone can find their own facts or find information that counter what you believe is facts.  Case in point would be COVID.  We have multiple doctors that have viewpoints all over the place concerning the virus, how to combat it and what works and what does not.  At the moment one person fact may be disproven or updated depending on new data that comes in.

Using Climate Change their are still many scientist who do not go along with the majority.  Just because its a majority doesn't mean they are all correct and their may be points being withheld that counters to their opinion whether educated or not.  Even data can be viewed in different ways if not represented by actual occurrences.  Here is a link on the Pros and Cons on the subject but the main thing to understand is that anyone can find data that supports their viewpoint.  

https://climatechange.procon.org/

If it can be disproven, it's not a fact!

Facts are, the climate is changing, the changes are causing issues and can cause bigger issues in the future.
Conclusion, we might want to do something about it instead of arguing about who causes it.

Of course you'll need some theory what causes it to do something about it. Or you can move coastal cities out of the way and start building new cities further North. Less pollution is never a bad thing though.

Same with Covid

Facts are: Covid is very contagious, can last long and is deadlier than other virulent diseases that are currently around.
Conclusion, we should get rid of it.

The rest are all correlations. Mask use, social distancing, closures have all shown to reduce the spread. Fact is, nothing is 100% effective, but it doesn't have to be. Stay below Rt1 and it will go away.

People get too hung up on the details and lose the bigger picture. In the end, what's better for the economy, wear a mask and skip a holiday or close everything down.



TheLegendaryWolf said:
vivster said:

That viewpoint is way too idealistic. It is not viable to check every single personal thought against biases. You can also not always lower yourself to other people's viewpoint, especially since they will never do the same. At some point ignorance will become dangerous and then the gloves need to come off.

If there is one side who mostly bases their opinion on facts and one side who mostly uses lies then it is prudent to give the benefit to the former and ignore the latter. Doesn't matter if the liars sometimes tell the truth or that the good people sometimes lie or err. It's not upon us to sift through their garbage in hope to find some kind justification for people's horrible actions, especially when they won't put in the effort.

Ignorant people who refuse to acknowledge facts after you present it to them can't be reasoned with, so the only thing left is to shout them down immediately. Because if you don't they will feel justified in their beliefs. It's how the US or any other fundamentalist country got as bad as they are. They do not deserve respect, some don't even deserve tolerance. Tolerance is how dangerous cults grow.

Disregarding tolerance and telling certain people they don't deserve respect is also how dangerous cults (and regimes) grow, like all things there has to be a balance (better for the balance to lean just a little more to one side than having it lean all the way in one direction)

What kind of balance are you talking about? One side wants to save humans the other side wants to kill humans. Wanna balance that out and kill only half of the people? How about trying to save as many as possible instead? Serial killers deserve neither respect nor tolerance. If you don't stop killers they will just kill again.

The fear that the left will somehow take everything over and rule with an iron fist is completely unfounded. The left will never rule because it has to fight against human nature and the most powerful apolitical enemies in corporations. The only way to keep things "balanced" is to throw everything to the left in the hopes something will stick. Giving one inch to the right will mean losing 10 inches.

It's also harder, if not impossible, to grow cults on the side of science and facts.

Last edited by vivster - on 21 January 2021

If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.