No disagreement here!The only real unifying behaviour is assuming the other side of your argument is full of knobheads
shes a high powered government lawyer second only to simon silverdollar in the civil service hierarchyRemember when WHO said masks didn't work. Imagine if we had legally punished dissenters (beyond the social stigma many self righteous NYT readers held toward mask-wearers in those days)
Luka I'm sorry but your sister is a liberal cop with authoritarian tendencies I am sure you love her and she is a nice woman but this is an important part of her personality
Pass on my congratulations!—but also, it all makes senseshes a high powered government lawyer second only to simon silverdollar in the civil service hierarchy
There really isn't though, and the fact you think there is is testament to how effective the fossil fuel industry's disinformation campaign has been.Eg There is a real chance climate change forecasts and causal stories (anthropogenic origins) are wrong. It is a small chance, I wouldn't bet on it, but scientists themselves are more divided on details than media portraits would paint; punishing dissenters reeks of medieval church logic
Here we have a classic example of a liberal attempting to handle cognitive dissonance of clashing evidence: he uses recourse to a "disinformation campaign" which he has learned all about from reading The GuardianThere really isn't though, and the fact you think there is is testament to how effective the fossil fuel industry's disinformation campaign has been.
If anything, climate scientists' predictions have erred on the side of being too conservative.