~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Super-Chick
[–]nate_hoodsie35 points36 points37 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I’m a man. I’m a believer in climate change. Am I in the wrong for existing?
[–]Super-Chick[S] 33 points34 points35 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I’m a woman. I don’t believe in feminism and apparently I’m in the wrong for existing.
[–]nate_hoodsie12 points13 points14 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
In terms of psychotic feminazis, you are in the wrong. But if you’re with the right people, you’re not :)
[–]Super-Chick[S] 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
According to them I’m just a brainwashed woman who is looking for male attention. Honestly they just keep telling themselves that since it helps them sleep at night. They just can’t face reality.
[–]aroh10087611 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
When two women face harassment is the patriarchy, but when hundreds or thousands of male scientists have been talking about climate change and have been harassed because of that nobody bats an eye.
[–]ZeZapasta6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
mEn ExisTiNg aRe ThE SouRcE oF aLL OuR ProBleMs
[–]laptopdragon2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
her username does NOT check out.
[–]TheGhoulishSword2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Always the patriarchy, you know? Clearly. /s
[–]RichardJLyon2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There is literally no issue that the divisiveness of feminism doesn’t irreparably damage.
[–]fuckyouredditx21 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Someone get this one a fucking medal
[–]bigolmeany1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Ecofeminism is what they call it. Apparently there is no movement feminists won't steal and inject with their repulsive philosophy.
[–]Super-Chick[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well this news here ruined my day!
[–]SSJRobbieRotten1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I swear to god the words Patriarchy and Misogyny are so overused they're meaningless now
[–]Super-Chick[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It’s just another buzz word people throw around.
[–]SSJRobbieRotten1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
True
[–]RXelaH19841 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It all comes back to the victimhood complex. These people make the Women’s Suffrage Movement look bad.
[–]Super-Chick[S] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Amen.....
or
Awomen for those who get triggered too easily.
[–]baronmad2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
Greta should go back to schooll we are aware of climate change, the problem is we have no viable options right now. We are doing the best we can with the economy we have you want to help solve it, go back to school figure some shit out come up with solutions.
AOC should also go back to school, take economy for idiots with sub 50 iq a few times over to hammer in some points which seems far to hard for her to understand.
I dont dislike women, i dislike idiots there is a difference you see.
[–]Super-Chick[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
We consumers can’t stop consuming otherwise the economy will drop. We’ve done this for many years now and we can’t change overnight but it may take centuries to fix (if we last that long). But in my opinion we’ve made our bed so might as well lay in it.
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
If we continue on our current path, we don‘t have centuries.
The young people haven‘t made the bed, they shouldn‘t have to lay in it. The boomers have made the bed and gotten rich off it, how about they suffer the consequences?
We don’t have centuries if we continue no. By the time we come up with a plan to save this dying planet the boomers and maybe even we will be gone from this planet. By that I mean we don’t have our priorities straight. The boomers will never lie in the bed because they weren’t making it for themselves. They won’t suffer the consequences since they won’t be around when the problem becomes unsolvable.
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Make flying more expensive, tax carbon emissions, ban cruise ships.
You know what that would do? It would give the state more money to tackle new projects like wind farms and pumped-storage hydroelectricity. And it would at least reduce the carbon footprint a little until the major changes can be implemented like research on better energy storage for affordable electric cars and the such.
To say we‘re doing the best we can if we‘re doing nothing (we are actually making it worse and worse each year, so we are doing worse than nothing) is a blatant lie that only aim to protect the status quo. Fuck every generation that comes after me, I want to enjoy my cheap electricity and not pay to repair the damages I‘ve done.
[–]baronmad-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
No it wouldnt im sorry to say.
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So where do you see the problem? Do you think that these measures wouldn‘t reduce carbon emissions? Or that a carbon tax won‘t give the state more money? Just saying „no“ is not a counterpoint.
[–]Jex117-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
the problem is we have no viable options right now.
This simply isn't true.
We are doing the best we can with the economy we have you want to help solve it, go back to school figure some shit out come up with solutions.
Bullshit. You don't know what you're talking about. We aren't doing jack shit to solve the climate crisis.
What do you mean jack shit? We have more people going on cruises than ever before, we are eating more meat and we are releasing more CO2. What else do you want us to do? Not fuck up more and more each year? Capitalism is built on growth and that means we have to make bigger mistakes next year!
[–]baronmad0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I think you need to read up a little bit on renewable energy then because we are no where even remotely close to solving that problem. We are still so far behind that all our possible solutions is no solution to this date.
[–]Jex1170 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Again, you simply don't understand what you're talking about. You're perpetuating fallacies.
[–]baronmad0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I have the feeling that you are projecting here.
[–]SquattermalianGibzme0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And expecting western nations to fix it when the majority of the pollution comes from 3rd world shitholes does no good.
[–]MegaMindxXx1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
We won't get brainwashed by the climate change hoax so they call us misogynists. Pathetic.
[–]Super-Chick[S] 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Especially when they got brainwashed by the feminist hoax.
[–]KevinAndWinnie4Eva1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nah, AOC is just an imbecile.
[–]joker380 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So, a climate denier denies our planet has some form of climate?
[–]Philletto-2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They are Denying (what I claim to be) Science!
[–]InformalCriticism0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So, is "journalism" the first word that conservatives get to change, after the hundreds of words liberals have shaken up and invented?
Journalism has nothing to do with reporting facts or the truth.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Ha! Well, to all the climate skeptics out there, here's a t-shirt.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07XNNBBXZ
What does „heat rises before CO2“ even mean?
But great shirt to out yourself as a lunatic, maybe go with flat earth cap for the double takedown.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Love the response. It's always a great rhetorical fallacy to illegitimately connect two unconnected topics in order to 'tar' the other person by association. (Like the term 'denier').
Heat rises in the historical record ~800-1000years before C02 rises. This is not in contention and it is a fundamental problem for the warmist theory.
Anyway - I'm not too concerned with avoiding being seen as 'a lunatic' since science is actually based on differing theoretical formulations and strong explanation. It is not based on popular agreement. That has nothing to do with truth, otherwise the Earth would have been flat because everyone believed it. However, beliefs do not dictate reality, so the slavish fear of the 'climate crisis' is naught but a chimera. That's the way the data looks to about half the population.
But - way to out yourself as a dogmatic warmist unwilling to be curious about the debatable points of climate change. +1.
Yeah, that flat earth thing wasn‘t an argument. In my eyes, both groups are similarly crazy, but they aren‘t the same.
Thanks for the explanation though. So either the science behind CO2 being a GHG is wrong or the amounts of CO2 we measure in the atmosphere is wrong. Good read on the topic because it also mentions your argument.
Science is a rough term to use here. Mathematical sciences are based on what‘s true. We just discover what is true, but that doesn‘t change the world around us. The problem comes with observational science. You can‘t prove a theory unless it‘s mathematical in nature. So we always work with the best model available to us. Think of Newtonian gravity before we discovered relativity. Worked but wasn‘t true. Same could go for a lot of currently accepted theories. But, here‘s the catch: We still need a model of reality. Disregarding every model because „it might be wrong“ is just disregarding science. So how do we determine the model we use? Scientific consensus. If an overwhelming majority of scientists agree on a suitable model, that is the scientific model for the time being. And if new evidence comes in and disproves our model, we adapt and find a better fitting one. Science is in a way based on popular agreement, the agreement of scientists. And how do they agree? Look at the evidence. An when 99% (off the top of my head, so don‘t quote me on that number) of scientists agree that climate change is happening, is man-made and needs to be addressed: Then that is the scientific consensus.
That's the way the data looks to about half the population.
And that‘s the problem: The population isn‘t what matters here. Scientists are, and they agree.
Oh and what makes you think that I‘m not curious? Just because I don‘t agree with you, you think that I haven‘t looked at both sides? Quality gatekeeping here. I‘ve looked at the studies, I‘ve heard what climate deniers (I know you don‘t like that word but with such strong evidence, it‘s what describes you best) have to say and I‘ve looked into what was said. And for every. single. point. I found an overwhelming majority of evidence pointing in the direction of climate change.
[–]SquattermalianGibzme-1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Or maybe - hear me out - they're both just stupid bitches.
[–][deleted] 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]Super-Chick[S] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Attack on masculinity? Masculine intervention?Yeah I’ve never heard such bullshit in my life.
[–][deleted] 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
After reading this I got a headache. So basically climate change deniers are essentially anti feminists who refuse to go with climate change activism because its stereotyped to be a feminine activity? Since there’s stereotypes and stereotypes are not facts the article itself is biased.
This article sounds like flaming bullshit. I would expect nothing less from these kinds of writers.
[–][deleted] 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
You do realize that I disagree with the article as a whole right? I don’t know why you’re so hellbent on saying that the article is right and what not. It seems like you actually believe that the article is reasonable with its stance (imo its not).
Edit: Saying that stereotypes affect people’s mindset and thinking is plain stupid. Stereotypes are simply generalizations based on opinions not facts. To say that stereotypes have a role in non bias studies is also moronic.
[–][deleted] 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
No I’m not criticizing the wrong thing, you just took it the wrong way and that’s completely your fault. Stereotypes are generally just made up and if you think I’m gonna take an article whose main key point has stereotyping and then they try to show me facts or studies that show “facts” so yeah don’t act surprised if I don’t believe them.
I can’t be the judge of how you see the world and how you justify stereotyping. However I can be the judge of saying that you completely miss the point of context and made your own assumptions. I know what I am criticizing and I don’t know who you think you are to tell me otherwise but what I do know is that because of your ignorance I am completely wasting my time to type this message.
To clear it up: I read the article (found it stupid) and decided to move on. What I found really stupid that (in the I linked picture in case you werent aware) they say that the imaginary “patriarchy” is a given factor to climate change denial. Now in what context did I ever mention that I was criticizing the article? Because maybe if I was I would have linked it (just a thought). The only time I criticized the article was when you asked me my thoughts on it. I was criticizing the way it DISPLAYS the article if it didn’t click in your mind already.
So I’m not sure if you’re really a troll who enjoys wasting time or if you really are this dense and you don’t understand context.
So have you wasted enough time?
Yes you have. Don’t expect a reply.
© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]nate_hoodsie35 points36 points37 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 33 points34 points35 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]nate_hoodsie12 points13 points14 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 11 points12 points13 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]aroh10087611 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ZeZapasta6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]laptopdragon2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheGhoulishSword2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RichardJLyon2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuckyouredditx21 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bigolmeany1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SSJRobbieRotten1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]SSJRobbieRotten1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RXelaH19841 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]baronmad2 points3 points4 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]baronmad-1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jex117-1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]baronmad0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jex1170 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]baronmad0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SquattermalianGibzme0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MegaMindxXx1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Super-Chick[S] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]KevinAndWinnie4Eva1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]joker380 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Philletto-2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]InformalCriticism0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LennartGimm0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SquattermalianGibzme-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]Super-Chick[S] -1 points0 points1 point (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]Super-Chick[S] 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]Super-Chick[S] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]Super-Chick[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link