+91

Not every issue has two legitimate sides (e.g. global warming), amirite?

84%Yeah You Are16%No Way
eldoritos avatar
Share
0 17
The voters have decided that eldorito is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

There are always two or more sides to everything.
With global warming, we still don't know what part of it is natural warming/cooling cycle of the planet and what part is human induced/accelerated.
With gay rights, there is always a fine line between legal gay rights and the compulsory inclusion of gay people by religious institutes. We can all agree that gay couples should be allowed to be married and receive all the legal benefits of marriage but should a church be required to wed them?

lanas avatar lana No Way +4Reply

there should only be one side, its not true, but because no one researches, these things
it sells well

Controversial...

If you mean knowing that global warming isn't real then I completely agree with this post.
Otherwise...I couldn't disagree more.

Anonymous -4Reply
@If you mean knowing that global warming isn't real then I completely agree with this post. Otherwise...I couldn't...

Wrong. Global warming is real and is being caused by human activity and its effects will be devastating.

eldoritos avatar eldorito Yeah You Are +4Reply
eldoritos avatar eldorito Yeah You Are +1Reply
@eldorito I'm basing that off the scientific consensus.

"There's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy." - http://on.wsj.com/yqTUBR

What was that you were basing your argument on again?

Anonymous -2Reply
@"There's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy." -...

That statement was based off of people who went against scientific consensus.

I base my argument off scientific consensus.

eldoritos avatar eldorito Yeah You Are +1Reply
@eldorito That statement was based off of people who went against scientific consensus. I base my argument off...

"In 2003, Dr. Chris de Freitas, the editor of the journal Climate Research, dared to publish a peer-reviewed article with the politically incorrect (but factually correct) conclusion that the recent warming is not unusual in the context of climate changes over the past thousand years."

Actually, they are basing their arguments off of factually correct statistics. So I'd say that counts as scientific consensus.

Anonymous 0Reply
@"In 2003, Dr. Chris de Freitas, the editor of the journal Climate Research, dared to publish a peer-reviewed...

You got that article from the opinion section of the Wall Street Journal. Whoever wrote it is probably not scientifically literate.

eldoritos avatar eldorito Yeah You Are 0Reply
@eldorito You got that article from the opinion section of the Wall Street Journal. Whoever wrote it is probably not...

Actually, the article is signed by 16 scientists. The people who agree enough with the author to put their name on the article are all scientists, so there are no scientific errors in the article.

"Editor's Note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article"

Anonymous -1Reply
@eldorito There are, also, some scientists who don't believe in evolution.

There are, also, some scientists that believe global warming is real.

The scientists who don't believe in evolution and the ones who believe in global warming are at just about the same level of stupidity in my book.

Anonymous -1Reply
Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.