3 ms·

Enjoy https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/21272815_10155973144383968_2429428809021619842_o.png?oh=aa35014e9ab50f8cb29ada40d92694a2&oe=5A29A8DA https

• mannykannot 9y ago
  In your previous posts, you were not saying what you now say you were saying, because of the faulty logic you employed, and the conclusions you drew from employing it. In fact, even your latest, considerably watered-down statement is ambiguous at best, unless you did really mean to say that the IPCC says that climate change will have the effects that the media says. One of your original claims was that it is right to roll back flood regulations simply because they were justified (in part) as a response to climate change. Putting aside the obvious point that it makes sense to plan for the future, that is moot anyway, because recent events in Houston, NY/NJ and New Orleans have demonstrated that there is a flooding problem right now, with the climate we have now. Your position puts ideology, and preserving the facade of an illusion, over pragmatism. All but the most dogmatic of climate change deniers have moved away from denying that it is happening at all, to denying that it will have negative consequences, or denying the evidence is good enough to predict anything, or... Eventually, the only thing left for them to deny will be that anything can be done about it, and by then they might finally be right, thanks in part to their efforts.