this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
384 points (87.1% liked)
Share Funny Videos, Images, Memes, Quotes and more
2430 readers
96 users here now
#funny
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Maybe spend more time educating yourself on the realities of the situation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/100%25_renewable_energy
If reading wikipedia pages is the height your knowledge on the subject that explains a lot actually.
Ad hominem again. This is no way to have a constructive discussion. Please use arguments to support your position and don't attack the opposition personally.
I see somebody learned a new word. Good for you.
No argument offered, just a personal attack again.
I've already explained my argument to you repeatedly in multiple comments as have other people. Unfortunately, you've amply demonstrated lack of basic reading comprehension required to understand and respond to such arguments. Therefore there is no need to repeat these arguments. If you feel personally attacked when people point that out to you, that's entirely your problem.
You're still just attacking me personally, rather than engaging in discussion with me and replying to my arguments with your own views and arguments.
I tried engaging with you in discussion and quickly realized that it's pointless. Your "arguments" have been repeatedly addressed by me as well as multiple other people. You just keep regurgitating the same talking points you've memorized like a broken record.
I don't think that's true. You did not once address my argument that we should not produce more nuclear waste while we have no facility to store it in the long term in a safe manner.
I did address it repeatedly. Not having a facility is a choice, and Germany had many decades to figure out how to make one. It's pretty clear that Germans would rather destroy our environment by burning coal than to actually get serious about moving from fossil fuels. Your actions speak for themselves.
Yes and there is no such facility. So we can't store our nuclear waste. Germany also wants as I stated multiple times to phase out coal power by 2038. Germany has currently 52% renewables and aims to be climate neutral by 2045. The move away from fossil fuel has been decided in Germany years ago.
sure
What are your trying to say?
That I see no point continuing the discussion.
There was no discussion, you only attacked me and all of Germany personally and offered no arguments in opposition to mine.
https://www.student.unsw.edu.au/discussion-skills
😂
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/the-human-equation/201003/nine-ways-lose-argument-even-if-youre-right
I love how you're still under the delusion that I'm trying to change your mind on anything.
Still no argument given to support your point or to deconstruct mine. Your resorting to evasion now. Just another fallacy: https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Avoiding-the-Issue
You're a hopeless debate bro seeking attention. Whatever points you've mustered here have been addressed repeatedly, yet here you still are pretending otherwise.
No, you did not. My argument is that we should not produce more nuclear waste as long as there is no adequate storage facility. Please elaborate your counter argument without personal attacks and if possible based on credible sources.
I have addressed this exact point in several different replies to you.
No you did not. You always addressed the point that we could build a long term storage facility. But these are not existant in Germany and as long as that's the case we should not produce more nuclear waste. You did never address this point.
You can keep repeating that all you like. Anybody reading this thread can judge for themselves.
Yes, and I will: As long as there is no adequate long term storage facility we should not produce more nuclear waste. Maybe you can try addressing this argument instead of resorting to evasion or ad hominem fallacies.
The fact that you keep pretending that your argument hasn't been addressed is what makes this whole thing so hilarious.
Evasion fallacy again. No arguments given no valid points made.
You keep on repeating that if that makes you feel better.
Yes I will as long as you do not engage in a civil discussion, employ fallacies and do not offer arguments or sources to support your opinion.
good for you buddy
No source, no argument, just evasion again. Try supporting your opinion next time and you might make a valid point, but not like this.
learn to take a hint when people are done trying to have a discussion with you
I can see that you keep making no points and again attacking me. Maybe you can try offering arguments to support your views next time.
I can see that you keep replying unable to move on from this. Since you like links and sources so much here's one for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perseveration
This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. you're evading again instead of supporting your opinion with arguments and sources.
You can keep repeating this as much as you want, it's not going to make it true.
I do think it's very much true: You keep evading without offering arguments or credible sources to support your opinion
great, you keep on thinking that
Do you have a different opinion? Wanna try backing it up with an argument or a source?
Maybe use arguments rather than succumb to ad hominem fallacies
Your username checks out
Yay more ad hominem fallacies. Try using arguments next time please.
You don't understand what ad hominem means. Ad hominem isn't just when you insult someone. Ad hominem is when you attempt to logically refute a point by using the speaker's character as a source of evidence.
Ad hominem example:
No ad hominem, just insulting:
My comment could not have made any logical fallacy because I made no attempt at logic or making an argument. All I intended was an insult. Again, username checks out.
I dont think that's right. Here's a helpful definition:
The definition of ‘ad hominem’
In Latin, ‘ad hominem’ means “against the person.” In an ad hominem argument, the person attacks the source of the argument rather than the argument itself. In other words, when the argument makes personal attacks rather than dealing with the subject at hand, it’s ad hominem.
Source: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365-life-hacks/writing/what-does-ad-hominem-mean
Again, I made no attempt at making an argument, so my statement could not be an ad hominem argument.
When someone made fun of you in school, did you say "well, akshually, that's ad hominem ☝️🤓"
I don't think we should behave as if we are school kids. I think we should behave like grown ups and respect each other, while discussing these matters.
Now, see, that's a straw man argument, because I didn't say we should behave like school kids, I just used a tangential example involving school kids.
If you're not interested in discussing the issue at hand that's okay.