|
|
|
|
|
by BackBlast
1784 days ago
|
|
Such engagement would be better than how I've generally been treated as an opponent of climate change alarmism. Historically the arguments boil down to, emotional appeals like this story. Buy now or lose the opportunity forever! We are reaching an inflection point! This is a story angle I've seen dozens of times at this point and none of the dire predictions have ever come to pass. The other major one is "you're not qualified to have an opinion on the topic". There are numerous pieces on how various branches of science have a very broken peer review process. The academic incentives are perverse, publish or perish, and peer review is a low budget method that has lots of issues that crop in. My main issue is, is modern science reliable enough to make such predictions? All meta science material I've seen says no, they are not. So my preference would be, fix the system so it stops producing sensationalistic garbage and then we can talk about what might need to change about fundamental economic underpinnings. |
|