Originally posted by Surtur
Both instances show it's all about *how* you deliver a message. A teenager having a mental breakdown being used as a tool of propaganda is perhaps not the way to go.
Instead of asking themselves if perhaps they or others they know somehow contribute to the raised issue and if there is anything they could personally do to contribute to the solution, these people become incredibly pissed off because they don't like how it was presented or feel personally attacked for doing the kind of shit that was said to contribute to the problem.
It's easier to have those knee-jerk reactions and talk shit than taking a moment to reflect and making any necessary changes, though, I guess.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Imagine being outraged that other people are outraged.
Originally posted by Surtur
He's mad as hell that other people aren't gonna take it anymore and he's not gonna take it anymore.
Originally posted by Silent Master
True, they're outraged over someone pushing a political agenda, while you're outraged about outrage.
Right now, I'm outraged with your oversimplification of my outrage, as well as with your superficial outrage over my outrage over the illogical Super Saiyan outrage found in this thread, the Gillette ad thread, and Colin Kaepernick threads.
Originally posted by Silent Master
I don't know, hence my comment about not understanding the nuances past you being outraged that other people were outraged.
I thought I outlined it pretty well throughout this thread and the Gillette thread, and possibly the Kaepernick threads if I did post on the ones on KMC.
In short, I think this is another case in which a party presents a legitimate issue and asks society to work toward a solution. Many of those who oppose them are dwelling on the delivery rather than focusing on the message, or distort the message entirely. They get pissed off and either actively contribute to the problem or accept it as an inevitability, rather than admit there is a problem and that we can and should be doing more individually and as a society to correct it.
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I thought I outlined it pretty well throughout this thread and the Gillette thread, and possibly the Kaepernick threads if I did post on the ones on KMC.In short, I think this is another case in which a party presents a legitimate issue and asks society to work toward a solution. Many of those who oppose them are dwelling on the delivery rather than focusing on the message, or distort the message entirely. They get pissed off and either actively contribute to the problem or accept it as an inevitability, rather than admit there is a problem and that we can and should be doing more individually and as a society to correct it.
Whether the message is valid at all is a legitimate contention.
Originally posted by cdtm
Whether the message is valid at all is a legitimate contention.
That we should listen to the scientific community and implement ways to reduce emissions (and pollution in general) that are detrimental to our health, damage ecosystems, and contribute to climate change?
How so?
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
That we should listen to the scientific community and implement ways to reduce emissions (and pollution in general) that are detrimental to our health, damage ecosystems, and contribute to climate change?How so?
You do know many scientists believe this is a hoax right?
Go back a page or 2, check the vid I posted about a scientist being stopped to post a paper because he had different of poisons and facts regarding global warming.
We honestly shouldn’t be listening to a child talk about this. The science community are the one that needs to come forward, lay out all the facts, and allows us to discuss it. Not use a child, nor a Vice President, or celebrities who has committed far more harm to the world than a middle class individual.
Originally posted by SquallX
You do know many scientists believe this is a hoax right?Go back a page or 2, check the vid I posted about a scientist being stopped to post a paper because he had different of poisons and facts regarding global warming.
We honestly shouldn’t be listening to a child talk about this. The science community are the one that needs to come forward, lay out all the facts, and allows us to discuss it. Not use a child, nor a Vice President, or celebrities who has committed far more harm to the world than a middle class individual.
That sixteen-year-old isn't claiming to be the expert and presenting her own research findings. She's literally telling governments and industry to listen to the warnings of the scientific community, who have come out to say climate change is real and a lot of the shit we're doing is contributing to it in a major way. Most didn't listen or act in any meaningful way, and that's what she wants to change.