← Back to context

Comment by jpadkins

18 hours ago

[flagged]

Amazing hyperbole, and a deflection from the real issues. You can fight against wrongdoing without actually advocating people being killed.

Right now, climate change is an undeniable fact, its causes well-known, and the evidence for it now part of everyday life. If anything, its effects have been underestimated to date, and 'non-believers' in it are either fools or acting based on morally repugnant principles.

Instead of this lazy deflection, you should suggest what you believe would be an appropriate attitude towards these people.

  • I think it's fine to engage in a healthy debate with skeptics, informed with facts and well supported suppositions as long as you have the bandwidth. I also acknowledge that one does not have to respond to skeptics, as they can waste time and energy. However, convincing the public of major changes of lifestyle and economy should be hard. At some point, you have to address the skeptics that bring up good, well reasoned arguments. Declaring them "enemies of mankind" is not persuasive, nor does it lead to peaceful resolution of important debates.