[hotpotamus]

Did you read the post? It's an extremely thoroughly sourced article about the issues already reaching crisis points in this year, 2023. You can scream about biases all you want but that will not stop the ever increasing carbon content of the atmosphere. It hardly matters anymore anyway I suppose.

[alex_lav]

> It's an extremely thoroughly sourced article about the issues already reaching crisis points in this year, 2023.

I didn’t have to, because the title affirmed what I’d find. And as a person that already believes in climate change, biased articles don’t really give me anything.

> You can scream about biases all you want

Pointing out a bias isn’t “screaming”, and the assertion that this is how I behaved is in bad faith.

My point is objectivity is important. Regardless of topic. Biased writing about climate change goes both ways, and if you support content like this, I don’t really see how you’re allowed to complain about obviously biased content denying climate change.

[hotpotamus]

Is the article wrong?

[alex_lav]

If you provide sources, does that mean you’re right?

[hotpotamus]

> The reason people can believe that everything is going to be OK is because they have not taken the time to comprehend all the different things that are going wrong simultaneously, nor how seriously these things are going wrong.

Essentially saying, "nah uh" to that is not a satisfying response and tends to make me believe that our doom is essentially irrefutable at this point. And I say that as someone who tries to look for hope in the current situation. It's hard to find and I've independently come to much the same conclusion that Brain has in this article.

[alex_lav]

...what's this related to?