One of the things that rarely get mentioned is the way uranium gets mined, almost always next to poor and marginalized people, leaving disease and unlivable places. Something that doesn’t get included In the .gov stats ofcourse.
One of the things that rarely get mentioned is the way lithium and cobalt get mined, almost always next to poor and marginalized people, leaving disease and unlivable places. Something that doesn’t get included In the .gov stats ofcourse.
Lmao no it won’t be, have you been hiding under a rock?
More often than now can still be rare.
You also don’t need to resort to attacking your opponent to try and make a point. The only thing you succeed in is making yourself look like someone who doesn’t actually have a point and needs to use logical fallacies to try to get anywhere.
I tried to keep things scientific, but your response just seems like an emotional knee-jerk reaction to me.
My intention wasn’t to attack but the “hopefully we won’t have too many droughts” comment while we are on a clear trajectory to a world of +3c flabbergasted me and struck a nerve, I genuinely do not understand how you can make a statement like this, today, if you even have a basic knowledge of anthropic climate change
Also you say this right after you completely misrepresent my argument like I somehow don’t care about the situation of cobalt and lithium mining, which is why I mentioned explicitly it isn’t a solely nuclear issue and that even oil extraction causes huge suffering for anything and anyone in it’s vicinity.
So you try to keep things scientific but it seems to me like you failed and you are just emotionally knee-jerking right now fr.
Like I said, this drought causing NPPs to shut down is big news because it such is a rare occurrence. This year broke a record set in 2018.
I never suggested it wouldn’t occur less rarely than now, but that doesn’t mean it won’t still be rare. It’s your jumping to conclusions and emotional response that’s the issue, not my lack of understanding of climate change.
completely misrepresent my argument like I somehow don’t care about the situation of cobalt and lithium mining
Then why even make this argument if it goes both ways? I didn’t misrepresent it, I just showed you what a silly argument it was.
you failed and you are just emotionally knee-jerking right now fr
The only way I failed to keep things scientific is by not getting an objective response from you. This could have been a friendly conversation based on facts and ideas but you decided otherwise. But no, there is no knee-jerking on this side bud.
One of the things that rarely get mentioned is the way lithium and cobalt get mined, almost always next to poor and marginalized people, leaving disease and unlivable places. Something that doesn’t get included In the .gov stats ofcourse.
More often than now can still be rare.
You also don’t need to resort to attacking your opponent to try and make a point. The only thing you succeed in is making yourself look like someone who doesn’t actually have a point and needs to use logical fallacies to try to get anywhere.
I tried to keep things scientific, but your response just seems like an emotional knee-jerk reaction to me.
My intention wasn’t to attack but the “hopefully we won’t have too many droughts” comment while we are on a clear trajectory to a world of +3c flabbergasted me and struck a nerve, I genuinely do not understand how you can make a statement like this, today, if you even have a basic knowledge of anthropic climate change
Also you say this right after you completely misrepresent my argument like I somehow don’t care about the situation of cobalt and lithium mining, which is why I mentioned explicitly it isn’t a solely nuclear issue and that even oil extraction causes huge suffering for anything and anyone in it’s vicinity. So you try to keep things scientific but it seems to me like you failed and you are just emotionally knee-jerking right now fr.
Like I said, this drought causing NPPs to shut down is big news because it such is a rare occurrence. This year broke a record set in 2018.
I never suggested it wouldn’t occur less rarely than now, but that doesn’t mean it won’t still be rare. It’s your jumping to conclusions and emotional response that’s the issue, not my lack of understanding of climate change.
Then why even make this argument if it goes both ways? I didn’t misrepresent it, I just showed you what a silly argument it was.
The only way I failed to keep things scientific is by not getting an objective response from you. This could have been a friendly conversation based on facts and ideas but you decided otherwise. But no, there is no knee-jerking on this side bud.