3 ms·
No the manipulation is the story about the abandoned settlement. I don't think you understood my point at all. The only assertion I made is that land being los
by adventskalender 7y ago
No the manipulation is the story about the abandoned settlement. I don't think you understood my point at all.
The only assertion I made is that land being lost to the sea is not a new or outlandish thing. For that 14th century is sufficient - and even better in context of global warming, as there was no such thing in the 14th century. Also I am not a journalist publishing an article. So I mentioned the first example I remembered. If I was publishing an article, I would do more research.
- mannykannot 7y ago> ...and even better in context of global warming, as there was no such thing in the 14th century. On the contrary, that means it has little relevance to the resurgent concerns of the 21st. century. Your position is a form of denial that goes "we don't have to worry about global-warming induced X, because X occurred before there was global warming", which is, of course, bogus if global warming is significantly changing the scale of X. I get the impression that your feeling of being manipulated is precisely because you do not get this point. Furthermore, your complaint that the author did not write the article you wanted to read is of no interest and is not going to change anything.