Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JimMorrison
I must not be fun to argue with on this subject, no one wants to argue the validity of my points anymore.  |
Since you seem to be curious, I don't bother to debate certain issues on Teh Internetz unless some circumstance forces my hand. Global Warmism (and environmentalism, generally) belongs on that list. Religion and politics are the other topics I don't usually discuss online.
For an example of why, I refer you back to the highly-OT Bible discussion thread a while ago. I think we had a good discussion. My chief purpose was to dismantle a few stereotypes that the media has created. I don't know how well I succeeded, but I believe that I encouraged at least a few people to think beyond the cliche of evangelical Christians as being toothless, ignorant bigots.
Still, that thread took a
lot of my time. Hours per day. The effort wasn't sustainable in the long term, and I had to retire from the discussion. Also, while we did a good job of remaining civil, the thread was starting to devolve. Much longer, and I think we would have had a flame war going. Better to let the matter drop before that happens!
To recap, I don't debate Global Warmism online because:
- It's too time-intensive, and
- People get too hot about it, so the threads tend to degenerate into flaming.
But let's be clear: Simply because there isn't anyone who's willing to argue Global Warmism with you does
not mean that you've "won" the argument. (Whatever "winning" means in this context.) It simply means that people don't want to argue with you.
