AuthAuth

3 ms·

1.
by AuthAuth 5d ago
In your example you would be saying you want apple pie because it gives you all these vitamins. Then when told apple pie is not the answer and its actually kale you want them you immediately pivot to a different for ending up at apple pie.
2.
by AuthAuth 7d ago
Do you happen to know the video? I'm noticing a lot of channels putting out these history videos that tell a very anti us narrative because they leave out half the story.
3.
by AuthAuth 8d ago
Thats different to a military conflict where you are legally allowed to target and kill people you believe to be enemy combatants. Its up to Iran to protect their civilans at the end of the day. Im not even sure this should be prosecuted as
4.
by AuthAuth 8d ago
They are no different from any person. No more or less cruel
5.
by AuthAuth 8d ago
Only if the intent was there which it doesnt seem to be.
6.
by AuthAuth 8d ago
Its fine for China to develop. The blame is on them disregarding human rights and environmental outcomes to get there.
7.
by AuthAuth 10d ago
The conspiracy is that a significant portion of deaths were from the idf and the language they used aligns with that conspiracy.
8.
by AuthAuth 10d ago
These supports my argument more than yours. You are posting confirmation of what im saying and articles that are speculation and out of context quotes or complete rejections of the claims you are making.
9.
by AuthAuth 10d ago
The conspiracy is lying and that it was more than it actually was to downplay the hamas deaths. Re-read the comment I replied two and look at the way its worded "The immediate response to the 10/7 infiltration attack was extremely
10.
by AuthAuth 10d ago
Thats fair.
11.
by AuthAuth 10d ago
I dont trust anyone who votes right wing its that simple.
12.
by AuthAuth 10d ago
Its annoying because thats what people want from small business but as a contractor you're usually working so you have to do your trade and be available to take calls like a receptionist. Better if they'd just send an email or use
13.
by AuthAuth 11d ago
This is a conspiracy that has next to no evidence to support its claims. Judging by your usage of extremely lethal im going to guess you think a significant % of the deaths that day were friendly fire. IDF have addressed both the friendly f
14.
by AuthAuth 11d ago
Per captia emissions is the most useless stat and by the way China's per captia emissions are high now so update that talking point. As for the western market argument, governments are responsible for managing their emissions not priva
15.
by AuthAuth 11d ago
The impact is a drop in the bucket emissions wise.
16.
by AuthAuth 11d ago
a drop in the bucket
17.
by AuthAuth 12d ago
You can say that but fossil fuels are still a huge part of their energy grid and energy generation is only one part of industrializing. Even if they did it 100% renewably which they arent it would still be devastating to the world. It doesn
18.
by AuthAuth 12d ago
Give me the argument why China should be able to hockey stick their emissions graph after 2014 when the world had their climate accords. Now also apply that logic to india and africa.
19.
by AuthAuth 12d ago
So you're fine for every country to industrialize in the cheapest dirtiest way and destroy the world because other its "unfair". No one is saying they cant industrialize, only that they have to be cautious about their emissio
20.
by AuthAuth 13d ago
Per captia data is not useful because they have so many people who live rural lives without tech. Their urban class was doing well and causing a ton of pollution just like the US does. They then scaled up even more in the least emission eff
21.
by AuthAuth 15d ago
Weighted means we should consider them differently. 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you have no idea what global warming is hits very different to 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you've known about global warming for 60 years and the entire
22.
by AuthAuth 15d ago
China was the 3rd largest economy in the world. Their middle class was fine. If they wanted to add some environmental regulation it wouldnt have halted growth.
23.
by AuthAuth 16d ago
So what? The goods get made in China because china allows them to be made with no emission/environmental/health and safety regulation.
24.
by AuthAuth 16d ago
You can look at the emissions growth of all the major emitters around 15 years ago and they're all slowing their growth and tapering off.. except china which is doing a hockey stick curve rushing to get as many coal plants down as they
25.
by AuthAuth 16d ago
At the time when china should have begun reducing emissions 2014 they were one of the biggest economies in the world.
26.
by AuthAuth 16d ago
emissions pre 1950 and post 2000 are weighted completely different. Emissions post 2014 climate agreement are weighed even heavier.
27.
by AuthAuth 16d ago
if not for China emissions wouldnt have gone past the point of no return.
28.
by AuthAuth 16d ago
Marx entire solution is that quote. Hes a quack but people still reference his 'theory'.
29.
by AuthAuth 16d ago
Do you really think that middle man services have enough leverage to convince the government to degrade their services? That is hard to believe. Its more likely that the government process just sucks and these services sprung up to fill a n
30.
by AuthAuth 17d ago
Marx's labour theory of value is only a theory of where profits come from and is largely rejected. Return on captial investment is not restricted to factory owners. All workers get a share of the surplus value and have the option to in

More ›