Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ialsoagree t1_je70gef wrote

"I base my science exclusively on 80s articles of Discovery and the real estate decisions of a multimillionaire who will be dead long before any negative effects of climate change affect his real estate. I are SMRT!"

9

Impossible_Oil_3662 t1_je7hpt0 wrote

I mean there were supposed to be major floodings and mass crops failures back when I watched the news in 1995 and still those "Doomsday" events haven't kicked in. Sry guys, but you people just wait and push the doomsday date further and further into the future. Start thinking critically.

−6

ialsoagree t1_je7k4ro wrote

"I saw on a tabloid that xyz was suppose to happen and didn't. So I use that tabloid as a reason to reject all science!"

The issue is, when you talk about "what the news said" and then use that to not reject news, but to reject science, I'm not really sure what point you think you're making.

If you want to show me a peer reviewed research article from the 1990's that made a claim about something that would happen by the 2020's and it hasn't happened, go ahead. But if all you have is "bUt ThE nEwS sAiD!!!!!" I don't really care.

I get my science from peer review, not the news.

9

Drachenfels1999 t1_je9f912 wrote

lol, there's never a shortage of angry redditors looking to get their pitchforks out.

1

Serious_Guy_ t1_jea9vfv wrote

My country just had unprecedented major flooding over a huge part of the country just weeks ago, with huge crop losses in the affected parts. Just because they were the worst floods in recorded history doesn't mean they will be the worst this decade. Sure, some other parts of the country that normally have consistent year round rainfall were suffering drought. But hey, we're not starving yet so everything is fine, right? Surely there's no way that having weather extremes that break records almost every year on a worsening trajectory will impact our food security in the long term, right?

1