Watch Greta Thunberg tear these corporate douchebags apart in the question round

[Moe Szyslak]

We have for decades ignored the arguments and factual criticism of professionals. Now we have to live with the frustration of the generation that will suffer.

[PC2]

Do you even hear yourself?

That's not an ad hominem!

*Proceeds to describe an ad hominem*

- - - Updated - - -

You see? No counter-arguments of any substance, just lame personal attacks.

This is exactly why all those pissy snowflake commentators are being taken to task.

There's a lot of ad hominem for sure but Fargus mentioned how she doesn't offer solutions. Which is true. At best she has advocated for some 'problem avoidance' policies which wont work as an overall strategy because civilization can't make any major progress without creating negative side effects. The idea that we can just keep banning/restricting stuff instead of innovating and solving the side effects isn't correct and would lead to a shrinking economy and stagnation.

[Fargus]

You see? No counter-arguments of any substance, just lame personal attacks.

This is exactly why all those pissy snowflake commentators are being taken to task.

It's not even a counter-argument, I'm actually making a point here. She is alienating those she is trying to convince. That's not an ad hominem. It is only such where I to disagree with her position and use a personal attack as a source of deflection, but that really isn't the point here. I will refer you to my previous post on my criticism of her:

It's not detracting the validity of her statement.

It has nothing to do with validity.

It has everything to do with optics.

You don't convince people by talking down to them and using a holier-than-thou attitude, because it alienates them.

She should care what these people think. After all, it's these people she's trying to convince. Stop using debating terms where they don't apply.

How many times do I have to explain this simple point to you?

[The Butt Witch]

"REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" - Greta Thunberg aka Jeanne D'Ork aka Jesus.

Words to live by.

[Mormolyce]

It's not even a counter-argument, I'm actually making a point here. She is alienating those she is trying to convince. That's not an ad hominem. It is only such where I to disagree with her position and use a personal attack as a source of deflection, but that really isn't the point here. I will refer you to my previous post on my criticism of her:

Still no arguments presented.

You'll talk about literally anything except the actual points she's raised. That's precisely what you're being mocked for.

- - - Updated - - -

There's a lot of ad hominem for sure but Fargus mentioned how she doesn't offer solutions. Which is true.

If she offered solutions he'd complain that we're getting policy advice from a 16 year old lol.

Obviously, the solutions are the domain of the experts, to whom Fargus and his ilk refuse to listen. That's the point.

- - - Updated - - -

"REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" - Greta Thunberg aka Jeanne D'Ork aka Jesus.

Words to live by.

"REEEEEEEEE" is exactly the response from conservatives to Greta Thunberg. That's why we're all pointing and laughing at them.

[Viconia]

First and foremost, I agree with the sentiment, climate change is something the world should take seriously.

On what's going on here, it's a person without special input, a palatable puppet used to convey a message. If it leads to something fruitful, great. If it just produces noise and ineffective means, bad. Greta has managed to acquire a voice people hear, so she should use it carefully. If there is no substance, actual working methods to counter climate change, she's of no more use to the world than any other banal activist. Promoting bad means is worse than inaction, just look at how Germany's energy plan went. I hope Greta herself learns her shit so she won't just speak out whatever inconsequential BS her promoters push.

[The Butt Witch]

Still no arguments presented.

You'll talk about literally anything except the actual points she's raised. That's precisely what you're being mocked for.

- - - Updated - - -



If she offered solutions he'd complain that we're getting policy advice from a 16 year old lol.

Obviously, the solutions are the domain of the experts, to whom Fargus and his ilk refuse to listen. That's the point.

- - - Updated - - -



"REEEEEEEEE" is exactly the response from conservatives to Greta Thunberg. That's why we're all pointing and laughing at them.

Who is "we"?!
Greta is a meme, and this is the general accepted consensus outside of a minority who supports her and who are all far-left.

She is a mentally ill sanctimonius brat who yells at adults, and doesn't know jackshit.

[Fargus]

Still no arguments presented.

You'll talk about literally anything except the actual points she's raised. That's precisely what you're being mocked for.

Arguments for what? I made my position very clear here; as I said already, I don't necessarily disagree with her activism and her points on the climate.

I'm talking about the delivery.

Put this another way - suppose YOU were a climate change denier. If I were to dress you down, make you look dumb and be really condescending then I wouldn't be able to convince you all too well.

Stop arguing with me for the sake of it.

Obviously, the solutions are the domain of the experts, to whom Fargus and his ilk refuse to listen. That's the point.

Who said I refuse to listen to the experts? You utter idiot. If you want to continue using debating terms, that's called a strawman argument.

[PC2]

Obviously, the solutions are the domain of the experts, to whom Fargus and his ilk refuse to listen. That's the point.

Except there's no such thing as an expert when it comes to most of these complex systems, at least not when it comes to *policy solutions*. The idea that you can study the climate and economics and then know the related solutions is an appeal to authority fallacy.

[Fargus]

There's a lot of ad hominem for sure but Fargus mentioned how she doesn't offer solutions. Which is true. At best she has advocated for some 'problem avoidance' policies which wont work as an overall strategy because civilization can't make any major progress without creating negative side effects. The idea that we can just keep banning/restricting stuff instead of innovating and solving the side effects isn't correct and would lead to a shrinking economy and stagnation.

I love it how he tries to paint me as some sort of climate change denialist despite saying the contrary throughout this entire thread, him not knowing my position on the matter, as well as never saying that man-made climate change does not exist. The sheer irony that he would yell out "ad hominem, ad hominem"... then say that I ignore the voices of various experts. Laughable.

[zenkai]

I love it how he tries to paint me as some sort of climate change denialist despite saying the contrary throughout this entire thread, him not knowing my position on the matter, as well as never saying that man-made climate change does not exist. The sheer irony that he would yell out "ad hominem, ad hominem"... then say that I ignore the voices of various experts. Laughable.

Yup, that's what some of them do when they have no argument.

[Molis]

There actually is an instant solution. Everyone stop eating meat now. Just immediately. Just give it up.
Thats the real poluter. But big bucks going on there though, cant be talkin bout that.

This is false.

[Rigel]

Yup, that's what all of them do when they have no argument.

Corrected that for you. They chose to attack the messenger instead of the message. This forum has a lot of people attacking, making it seem like all they want to hear is stuff that the others repeat. I tried reading the shitshow thread but it's all bitching and moaning and attacking people who disagree....not really caring to hear any dissent. That's no way to have a conversation. Why keep attacking people instead of trying to convince them of something? Why not listen to something when it may actually be the exact same thing you are saying, like in this case?

[Clone]

Why does the right insist on being triggered by teenagers? Before this chick there was the kid from Parkland. The party of anti safe space and not being triggered by words in action.

[Saucexorzski]

Why does the right insist on being triggered by teenagers? Before this chick there was the kid from Parkland. The party of anti safe space and not being triggered by words in action.

To this date, no one has been more triggered, or wrong, about "kids" than the left about the January 2019 Lincoln Memorial confrontation. The shit this girl has gotten is a joke compared to the bullshit lies and straight up hostility those kids got.

[Cizr]

Why does the right insist on being triggered by teenagers? Before this chick there was the kid from Parkland. The party of anti safe space and not being triggered by words in action.

MAGA kids
Mini AoC

[wunksta]

Ignoring or not hearing viable solutions?

Ignoring. There's been a lot of viable solutions. For example, carbon tax was proposed and is considered a viable step towards reducing carbon emissions, yet the US and others have refused to implement it as a policy.

As for the forest issues in Brazil, I mentioned in other thread how a lot of the problems Brazil has is the lack of sustainable planning. Large swaths of forest are chopped and burned to make way for mines or agriculture, which only provides a short term profit for a small group of people. There's been several studies and proposals on how efficient land use can help maintain forest ecosystems and agriculture etc for the foreseeable future and provide benefits for the nation as it develops. Not to mention that there's tons of scientific and economic incentives to maintaining forests besides cutting it down for mining, such as biological and medical research and ecotourism.

[Orbitus]

To this date, no one has been more triggered, or wrong, about "kids" than the left about the January 2019 Lincoln Memorial confrontation. The shit this girl has gotten is a joke compared to the bullshit lies and straight up hostility those kids got.

Except right wingers have been wrong about lets see, Sandy Hook with fake killing bullshit Alex Jones conspiracy, Parkland "crisis actors" bullshit, Greta, and there are probably others that I haven't thought of because the news moves too fast with Trump bullshit.

[Muajin76]

Not a fan of using kids. If the arguments are sound let an adult make them and let kids grow up instead of using them as a novelty.

Are you suggesting that someone is feeding this information to say? Do you think that a 16yr old can't come up with this stuff all by themself?
So...if someone is feeding her this information, whom do you think it might be? *i doubt it's N'zoth*

[Saucexorzski]

Except right wingers have been wrong about lets see, Sandy Hook with fake killing bullshit Alex Jones conspiracy, Parkland "crisis actors" bullshit, Greta, and there are probably others that I haven't thought of because the news moves too fast with Trump bullshit.

oh sure the right wing made some noise but nothing compared to the pure seething hatred the left had during the January 2019 Lincoln Memorial confrontation. For 3 days many high profile left wingers publicly declared their desire to harm those children. Kinda sad.