What you're arguing is that Nuclear physicists are aware of a problem that they can't communicate and need to outsource out (to what are actually volunteers) to people that are Professional Loud Mouths to spread the word and make our lives hell.
Edit: Without actually informing us, mind you.
What you're arguing is that Nuclear physicists are aware of a problem that they can't communicate and need to outsource out (to what are actually volunteers) to people that are Professional Loud Mouths to spread the word and make our lives hell.
Edit: Without actually informing us, mind you.
I'm arguing no such thing. I'm arguing that a person's knowledge of x has no bearing on the truth of x.
I'm arguing no such thing. I'm arguing that a person's knowledge of x has no bearing on the truth of x.
It's a world stage debate, right
So challenging the speaker is a means to drive the ball forward for that side.
The burden of proof is on these people trying to ruin our lives.
If all they have to offer us is people that are experts in how to manipulate popular opinion, then it must not be that serious.
It's a world stage debate, right
So challenging the speaker is a means to drive the ball forward for that side.
The burden of proof is on these people trying to ruin our lives.
If all they have to offer us is people that are experts in how to manipulate popular opinion, then it must not be that serious.
(post is archived)