|
|
|
|
|
|
by smt88
2082 days ago
|
|
|
> It is also unhelpful to keep referring to individual points like this as illustrative. I don't know if you're in the US, but this is untrue here. Our most-watched media outlet spreads climate-change denial, as does the (minority) party that has controlled our federal -- and most state -- governments for the last few years. One of their tactics is literally to say that there is still snow, so global warming can't be real[1]. Articles like this are the counterpoints to that narrative, and there is evidence that individual data points are convincing[2] to people who are not able (or willing) to understand long-term statistical information. 1. https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/02/3-years-ago-... 2. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/03/climate-chan... |
|
|
The environmentalist movement has long been dogged by a sizeable aura of people who dilute the message with craziness and false claims. They are the major reason why progress is so slow - very few people trust them anywhere near anything important. I've yet to see an English-speaking Green party that I'd accept as competent to set policy even assuming they have the correct problems identified.