Recently,
chris_gerrib accused me of not taking a stand on what we should do about anthropogenic climate change, saying in one of the threads from this entry
http://chris-gerrib.livejournal.com/322157.html 9 out of 10 people use the "can't be sure" argument as an excuse to do nothing. Try harder
(
Read more... )
He certainly never acknowledged where you said: "I think that one of the major dangers of the current cold spell is that we may, foolishly, decide that this means that we have no climate problems and that if we do there's nothing that we can do about it. Problems with that: we're still pumping greenhouse gases uncontrollably into the atmosphere (we can't stop short of collapsing our civilization due to energy shortages), and if we are drifting into an Ice Age (Little or otherwise) this in itself would be a MAJOR climate problem."
Hardly the words of the knee-jerk denier his internal narrative has already decided you are. Ah, but who needs to actually read something before responding to it?
I don't know Daveon from Adam, but he really comes across like an idiot. Especially with regards to the N vs. S Korean thing. He forgets that while protests were cracked down on in the 80s by the repressive Southern dictatorship, protests ACTUALLY HAPPENED, and eventually (long term) resulted in change. In N Korea, those protests would never even have materialized to BE quashed. But, apparently because South Korea took some time to finally stabilize as a modern liberal democracy, and wasn't some kind of overnight miracle, the people there would be just as well off if we'd let them be absorbed into the northern regime. Don't look at N and S Korea in the 80s. Look at them NOW. Tell me there's an equivilance there, and tell me S Korea isn't a thousand times better off for our interference.
The guy ought to read "Nothing to Envy" by Barbara Demick. You want an eye opening look into what's ACTUALLY going on in North Korea, in the eyes and from the lips of the people who actually LIVED there, you can't do better than that book. Then he might see just how laughably naiive his statement was.
Reply
(*nods*)
He also implied that he thought that everything I said was just plain wrong, which (since some of what I said would have agreed with his own position) means that he massively contradicted himself.
Hardly the words of the knee-jerk denier his internal narrative has already decided you are. Ah, but who needs to actually read something before responding to it?
Which is one of the problems with attempting responses to the unread :)
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment