Thnboi666

5 ms·

1.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
Would be nice if they want after antifa/ancap/ancom extremists as well as neo-nazis. i sincerely doubt it considering the country of origin
2.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
Trump also had some pretty nasty things to say about the GOP, but he's working with them pretty well..
3.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
"Trump is listening to people who were assholes to him, even though he has no obligation to do so. Trump has no obligation to listen to people who are assholes to him. The POTUS has no obligation to listen to people who vehemently disa
4.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
might have to do with the callous way he talks about encryption, censoring the internet, and the "cyber" from the way he talks and from his background it's clear that he doesn't possess a technical understanding of the k
5.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
kinda like how trump acts when it comes to foreign relations eh!?
6.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
to apply my point - yes, it is determined that the climate will change, temperature will drop and rise. claiming that current changes are a part of this natural change is to say that it was pre-determined, and we didn't do anything to
7.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
thing is travelling along a pre-determined path. we can determine it is following this path. but we want to measure it. so we do, and we change it's pre-determined path. it still is and was always pre-determined. but it is not the same
8.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
Yeah I understand you. I'm just trying to get across the point that we do know, as far as we can, but it's not enough for most people who are in denial. saying we should act the same way in either case is just an auxiliary way to
9.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
""this is our best model, we're pretty confident it's right in the essentials" 'what do you mean you don't know, you're not sure? you could be wrong?!' that's how people see that. that'
10.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
furthermore general economics disagrees with you when it comes to the decisions of people who run the oil industry. how are they acting in anything but self-interest when they fund climate-change denial? it provides a direct economic benefi
11.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
so you mean lobbying groups for big oil aren't involved in the legislative process? hm. coulda fooled me. I literally formed my opinion this in grade 12 earth science class, where I was first shown inconvenient truth followed by a dire
12.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
So you're saying that oil companies are against climate change policy not because it directly harms their industry, but because they genuinely believe the climate is not being harmed by their industry? even if that (their belief that i
13.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
I agree here. I think people who deny climate change just need to nut up and say that their priority is the economy. the economic cost in reversing climate change means they lose big time. Is this a good reason to not favor that course of a
14.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
I don't see anything anywhere to show that the way carbon emissions increase global temperature to be false. greenhouse effect is a commonly observed phenomenon, and it's a plain fact that we emit carbon at extreme rates compared
15.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
in which case how do we prove this to be real beyond doubt? what do we do when people treat their opposition as faith, i.e. belief despite lack of evidence. for some people it will never be real. what do we do about that? is that a legitima
16.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
You're telling me that this isn't a philosophical debate and then telling me a philosophical opinion. Pragmatically, we make decisions. If a car is flying at you at high speed, stopping to think about determinism means you die ins
17.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
Even if humans cannot affect change in the climate, we are still going to need to prepare for that change. investing in renewables etc affects much more than climate. Good investments for the future tend to overlap with solutions to human-d
18.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
Say you have a house, you've owned it for 40 years. Winter and summer comes and goes, the house warms up and cools down regularly. To argue by analogy, you are then saying that the acute changes a human occupant could make to that envi
19.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
This is to imply that the resources spent on it have no effect other than to the extent that they affect climate change. which is WRONG.
20.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
So basically we have no free will so why should we change things? what. "if it's our species time to go" but it's NOT. we can make a change. this is like seeing a bulldozer slowly approaching your house - and instead of
21.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
Hudson's Bay has literally no ice on it for a major portion of the year. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/27/polar-be...
22.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
"But, the planet simply has periods of warmer temperatures and periods of cooler ones." https://xkcd.com/1732/ http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/010/193
23.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galen#Contributions_to_medicin... Galen and Hippocrates vital humors theory
24.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
Hey, I hope you do well in the future. It's hard to read this kind of stuff, but knowing this is how some people live makes me feel like I have nothing to complain about ever. I'm glad you have some good days. I share some of your
25.
by Thnboi666 10y ago
so the issue is reduced load on muscles and bones. 10x rate of bone resorption in osteoporosis. bones are the biggest worry imo. even though the astros work out 15 hours a week, it's still not enough to cover this rate of resorption, a