Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "Dan Crenshaw EXPOSES AOC and Bernie Sanders on climate change" video.

this whole video relies on an intentional uncharitable interpretation of AOC talking in jest?
19
@nikulas91 I wonder if you actually remember what was said in that film.
3
@nikulas91 "True or false, did he not say in the film at the rate we are going polar ice caps are going to melt in 5 years?" From the transcript of the movie I find this quote: "Starting in 1970 there was a precipitous drop off in the amount and extent and thickness of the arctic ice cap. It has diminished by 40 percent in 40 years. There are two studies showing that in the next 50 or 70 years in summertime it will be completely gone." Notice how he mentions the arctic specifically, not the antarctic and 50 years, not 5. What I suspect you are thinking of is something he said outside of the film. I don't recall exactly, but as I recall he said that there was a study that showed that the arctic sea summer ice could be gone within a certain number of years (if the rate of melting continued). I don't think it was as low as 5, but I don't think it was over 10 either. Again, this is about the arctic sea ice, not antarctic land ice which is the one that increases the sea level by melting.
3
@nikulas91 hm, you didn't say anything specific. I have talked about this movies "failed" predictions with a lot of people on the internet, and in almost every case they just interpreted the film wrong or misremembered something, or just repeat what someone else have said. Do you think there is any chance at all that you may have misinterpreted or misremembered anything in the film?
1
@nikulas91 I'm curious if you had any thoughts on my comment.
1
@nikulas91 the thing is, he wasn't wrong when he said that "if the ice melts in this rate, it'll be gone in ~8 years. That was correct since preceding those years it melted a lot! He never said, as far as I know, "I think this will happen".
1
@nikulas91 he was specifically talking about Arctic Sea Ice during summer minimum. Nothing to do with Antarctic, Greenland or year-round. "sea ice extent—the area of ocean with at least 15 percent sea ice concentration"
1
@nikulas91 "ok I don’t really know what specifically you are referring to" You really should if you make claims about how Al Gore has been wrong. I am specifically talking about one of those things you have said he got wrong. "I’m sure he got a few things right in his doc but he also got a few things wrong ..." But you haven't been able to point at a single thing in the doc that he got wrong... "... so let’s take the doc with a train of salt is my point..." Should you really make that point if you don't recall what the doc is about?
1
@nikulas91 "you were referring to something being gone, but not specific. So I had no idea what you were talking about... " But you said "ok I don’t really know what specifically you are referring to" after I explained what it was. "I listed multiple things that he got wrong... and u have refuted one of my points... but none of my other ones from my original comment:" Because I am specifically talking with you about the doc. "he said ... polar ice caps would be gone... still there..." He said could, not would. How would you describe the difference between "would" and "could"? "he said the glacier in mt Kilimanjaro would be gone by 2016" He did say "Within the decade there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro." in the doc, although not 100% sure what he meant by that, that is certainly wrong. "again ur saying a specific part of a glacier is gone." I have no idea what you are referring to here. "a lot of this stuff Dan Crenshaw has refuted in this video but I’m guessing u didn’t watch it?" Don't move the goalpost, we are talking about your claims about Al Gore's doc now.
1
@nikulas91 "u have refuted one of my points of my criticism of the doc..." You have only made one really, or two, it is tough to know since you are very vague in what you are saying. "-increase in hurricanes. (Not true)" Where in the doc is this claim made? I tried looking in the transcript but I didn't find any obvious reference to such claim. "Look u don’t even have to watch the film to realize he got stuff wrong ..." But you should know what the doc said if you want to criticize it. "The only reason I’m bringing the dan Crenshaw vid into this argument is because he helps refute some claims the movie makes..." How do you know? It seems you don't know any details about the movie at all.
1
@nikulas91 "ok how many things does al gore have to get wrong and how many misleading things does he have to say in the documentary for you to be satisfied enough to know that it’s a flawed documentary?" Good question, I think it is worse to be wrong about a fact today than speculation about the future. "I’m willing to rewatch it, and change my mind but from the few clips I have watch they were either misleading or wrong..." Which was? Only thing you have managed to point at is the Kilimanjaro thing so far. If something is "misleading", it might very well just be you making that interpretation because you want it to be misleading so that you can dunk on it.
1
@Cagliostro85 was that a serious question?
1
@Cagliostro85 so it was a joke that agrees with my point?
1