mozzaok
Gold Member
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/04666/04666d3b526a48e324509e26a2bf75951790e5e0" alt="*" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/04666/04666d3b526a48e324509e26a2bf75951790e5e0" alt="*" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/04666/04666d3b526a48e324509e26a2bf75951790e5e0" alt="*" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/04666/04666d3b526a48e324509e26a2bf75951790e5e0" alt="*"
Offline
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c1c0/4c1c0155efe533bee0b9a7eef27e06675cabb91c" alt=""
OzPolitic
Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender:
|
Yes Grendel, I can see how it could be applied to the more shrill climate change activists, who think that if we all start to eat organic vegetables, and live in tepees, then we all will revert back to blissful harmony with nature.
Like the denial side, we do not have a clear, A, or B, option, we have a range of views, and a range of responses, from those who believe it is real, and believe we need to at the very least, attempt to mitigate the worst scenarios, as much as is practicable, to those who will always call for extreme measures, because they are extremists..
I think that one thing that most people do agree on, is that arguing over whether it is real or not, benefits nobody. Even sceptics should agree with adopting a cautionary approach, because the stakes are too high to do otherwise.
|