Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "PragerU" channel.

  1. I love how he describes group 2 as "there are many things that has an impact on the climate" as if group 1 doesn't realize the same. LOL. It is pathetic how easy it is to show the dishonesty in this video.
    10
  2.  @ChipperWilliams  as if PragerU would be that one place where you get the 100% truth. Wake up Mr. Sheeple.
    5
  3.  @anthonybrett  how is that relevant? No need to be snide, that only makes you look stupid.
    4
  4.  @korppi164  the graph at 0:21 for instance. Why do you think he chose that one and not the one from the 50s? Because the one from 1997 best fit his narrative, where the whole timeline best fits reality, something he wants to avoid.
    4
  5.  @mobiusone6994  actually science is a lot about consensus. Consensus is based on experiments being done over and over again, building up a consensus that something is a thing. If things can be replicated, consensus is formed. If things can't be replicated, consensus is not formed. The ability to be replicated is the one thing science is about.
    4
  6.  @ChipperWilliams  it appears like that, but that is because you are bias. Somehow you don't seem to be that averse to calling people names, so maybe you should not be too hung up on that? All I said was that PragerU doesn't speak 100% truth. No one does. I watch PragerU every now and then because counter culture is important, but I don't like it when counter culture is hijacked by BS like this.
    4
  7.  @TheStockCarStig  as the video offers no evidence it is not needed. What he does is that he speaks out about disagreeing with the video without being biased against PragerU. It is not supposed to be a conversation ender, but a conversation starter.
    3
  8.  @jackpics  are you sure that you don't conflate "may happen" with "will happen"?
    2
  9.  @Blaze936  it shows that he is bias and we cannot take him by his words. He could be speaking the truth, but for his words to have any value everything he said has to be researched. At that point, his words have still no value since you have done the research yourself. All and all, his words have no value.
    2
  10. How is the question so important that is must have an answer?
    2
  11.  @rubiks6  living things adapt to Earth, not the other way around. The problem becomes when Earth changes quickly, by then the adaptation is a horrendous process. So much death.
    2
  12.  @ricktd6891  "... because they falsify the hypothesis" They don't. "... sheep pretend to know more about climate science than an actual scientist." Talking about yourself? "Why don't you point out "the dishonesty" in this video ? " I did. "... your opinion is meaningless to science." Yours as well.
    2
  13. it is very ironic indeed.
    2
  14. that is a good question, but don't expect the people here to give you an answer because they don't have it. All they do is try to come up with reasons for them not working on their moral character and doing something about climate change.
    2
  15.  @reson8  lol no, the point is extremely easy to understand. The question is if you understand what the implications of that point is. Clearly, you are not.
    2
  16.  @cosmopolitanbay9508  I am not arguing against that, my point is that combating climate change is about personal change and structural change.
    2
  17.  @skyblue9991  a point Prager of course does not address, because it kills his narrative.
    2
  18.  @borismcgillicutty3042  why can't we do both?
    2
  19.  @garetclaborn  will you move the cities along the coastlines? :)
    2
  20.  @garetclaborn  and how much have Manhattan moved last 30 years?
    2
  21. In my experience, right wing people know little about the education system. They like to complain about it instead of focusing on their own moral character development as Jordan would say. LOL. Hypocrites all of them.
    2
  22.  Verbalised Resonance  I am not saying we are driving climate change. I am saying that the fact that climate can change, we can change it. If climate couldn't change, we couldn't change it. This is extremely simple. Read what I write.
    2
  23. climate change followers actually do better predictions of climate than climate change deniers.
    2
  24.  @cagwscam6398  he omits the truth.
    1
  25. you should not listen to Bill Nye, you should listen to Scientists. Not one scientist, since ppl can be bought. You should listen to all Scientists. It is a lot more expensive to buy all of them, and you won't be able to buy them all. Most of them have integrity. This dude, has no integrity.
    1
  26. AGW will effect the poor people of the world, so they are screwed either way. Only way to help them is to convince the rich world to give them green energy.
    1
  27.  @stevedekker8754  it is sad that we now have to face the consequences :(.
    1
  28. what people deny is an ever receding position. Just look at the practice and position of the deniers in the past and you see how dishonest they are.
    1
  29. how will you adapt the coastal cities? force fields that never fail? :P
    1
  30. do you think we could if we tried?
    1
  31. he obviously has a point, but let's not take it too far and advocate for anarchy like many seems to do in the comment section.
    1
  32.  @MusicXscape  it would be in 1939.
    1
  33.  @jahqari8286  ignorance of what?
    1
  34.  @BwanaFinklestein  odd reaction? lol. Just because the past is worse doesn't mean the future is better. "Every generation there is a new "World Catastrophe" about to destroy everything." Of course there is always something that is at the current time most dangerous. As things are dealt with a new problems arise, what the most dangerous thing is will change over time. That doesn't make the question relevant.
    1
  35. no, because it is predictable. You just wait on next major solar maximum, they might kill you for speaking up :D.
    1
  36. and you know that these same PragerU followers are the first to say that USA should NOT fight climate change because China emitts a lot of carbon. Hypocrites all of them.
    1
  37. The graph at 0:21 is deceptive. The supposed trend line is not actually a trend line, and they chose to look from 1997 specifically since there was pretty much constant warming up to 1997. This is how easy it is to debunk "climate skeptics" a.k.a. climate deniers.
    1
  38. you have an example?
    1
  39. so why are the right for closed borders?
    1
  40.  @Cundalinis_Hand  exactly, controlling people. Let's not be hypocrites and say that only leftists wants to control people.
    1
  41.  @Cundalinis_Hand  and same goes for protecting people from climate change. It is not an attempt at controlling people, it is about keeping your citizens and society safe and prosperous.
    1
  42.  @Cundalinis_Hand  lol, this is the core of our conversation. Not answering your irrelevant questions is not deflecting, it is staying on topic. The right wants to control people just as much, the second example I give you is their stance on abortion.
    1
  43. not sure if that is correct. Haven't many brilliant men who brought great change to the world been deeply flawed men?
    1
  44.  john oboczky  what is your point?
    1
  45.  john oboczky  as I am not American I can't comment on your (I presume) education system. Slavery being allowed doesn't force (some of) them to have slaves. So you don't really address what he said. So you agree with the girl in the video and disagree with Jordan? Given that you agree with War, that is.
    1
  46.  john oboczky  what has that to do with anything regarding the content of this video?
    1
  47.  john oboczky  was there a law forcing people to have slaves?
    1
  48. nope they think the same as Jordan. When you have changed yourself, it is time to change someone else.
    1
  49. so we should just let Iran get nuclear weapons then, right?
    1
  50.  @CedWii360  if the girls would have asked what to do about the Iran nuclear weapon desire situation, what would Jordan answer? Would his answer be the same as what to do about climate change?
    1
  51.  @CedWii360  if you think that "We also need to start using renewable energy and stop being solely dependent on fossil fuels. Not just because of "Climate Change" ..." I don't get why you also think that "This was a very persuasive argument."
    1
  52.  @CedWii360  a fine response I think :). Given that, I still don't think Jordan's response to her was any good as we have no way of knowing her. I find it a bit hilarious that PragerU uses that as the way to deal with climate change, at the same time as their kind bashed Greta for not focusing on China instead of she doing what Jordan suggests. In general, the right that accepts AGW only say one thing: Don't look at us, look at China. They are the bad people.
    1
  53.  @reson8  because I disagree that his point applies to this situation, I am surprised you couldn't figure that out. "Besides, i wasn't replying to you anyway." Looks like I committed a serious crime then...
    1
  54. hehe yea I was like, what? So Jordan's argument is that people should become activists all of them?
    1
  55. so to all you who like this video, what are YOU doing against global warming? How are You improving YOURSELF so that you are not such a burden on the planet?
    1
  56. I don't particularly like PragerU and I understand why people criticize it/you, but when they shut people up where are they to go but here to make their voices heard?
    1
  57. so you are against democracy then I presume? :P
    1
  58.  @medusaskull9625  isn't voting something you do in order to improve your country? So people who haven't improved yourself.... ?
    1
  59. the questions the sheep followers of PragerU can never answer.
    1
  60.  @cosmopolitanbay9508  both are forcing change on other people.
    1
  61. depends on what you eat.
    1
  62. she really has nothing and you can see it on her body language
    1
  63.  @ReiEmeraldTakedo  tangent?
    1
  64.  @ReiEmeraldTakedo  You: Seems like a tangent to me. Me: tangent? You: Not in the slightest. Me: ???
    1
  65.  @ReiEmeraldTakedo  I was asking why you think corbin mcnabb's original comment was a tangent. It certainly did not seem like "an abrupt change of course" to me, if you looked at the video and read Tim Biagen's comment.
    1
  66.  @ReiEmeraldTakedo  the video doesn't have to substantiate the claim, it just have to build on the premise. You can argue about the premise if you like, which both Tim and Corbin does. So there is nothing tangential about it. I am honestly really confused about what you want to accomplish here.
    1
  67.  @ReiEmeraldTakedo  read again. I said "build on the premise", not "build a premise" as you said. Vast difference. What you explained is arguing the premise. The thing is that prager U doesn't say everyone will vote dem though right? If they do, PLEASE QUOTE and provide time stamp! So Tim isn't contradicting anything by saying that he won't vote dem. Tims comment is essentially utterly stupid, and so is all of yours. "Dropping in to make a declarative statement about whether or not the Dems rely on immigrant votes seems tangental to whether or not Tim is going to vote Dem, especially when he's already stated he won't be." You have gotten it all backwards. Tim is responding to a declarative statement about whether or not the Dems rely on immigrant votes. There is nothing tangential here. Again, what are you trying to accomplish here? I really can't understand, and boy am I trying. Forget about the most idiotic discussion about the definition of a tangent or what this comment or that comment is about. What do you want to accomplish here? I am listening.
    1
  68. so what to you do for the climate?
    1
  69.  @cavaleer  the ocean absorbs as much CO2 as it creates.
    1
  70.  @blainefriess9243  there are more things that determine local temperature than global levels of CO2. That is why.
    1
  71.  @abloogywoogywoo  ultimately though we don't understand anything. We have to make decisions on our best understandings.
    1
  72.  @MikeOzmun  all I can say is that I disagree, since you weren't very specific.
    1
  73. hey hey hey, don't change others. Start with your own moral character, you know.
    1
  74. who is saying we don't have it "better"? If you define "better" as "happier", I think the happiness index might prove you wrong.
    1
  75.  @KazzArie  what was his point with asking the question, regarding action against climate change? That we have a lot we can do ass a society since we live in such abundance?
    1
  76. so then why are these conservatives so against leftist women having abortions?
    1
  77.  @ChipperWilliams  I don't watch CNN and Al Gore is not a scientist. Why do you think I watch PragerU videos from time to time?
    1
  78.  @ChipperWilliams  that is not being "not truthful", the comment is there for you to read. What I did was a reference to what I said. The core of what I said is just that. Maybe you don't know the English expression "All I said"? Anyway, good try! I did not expect any different reaction, but it is a bit funny to see someone punch back twice as hard at the same time as they preach not punching in the first place. You are done with my idea that PragerU is not telling the truth 100% of the time? You really think they are? Honestly?
    1
  79.  @ChipperWilliams  you claim "You have shown yourselves to be a insulting troll and a name caller. Just calling it like I see it." yet you didn't cite anything? You know the definition of "refer to" right? "to talk about or write about (someone or something) especially briefly : to mention (someone or something) in speech or in writing" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/refer%20to I was referring to myself, keeping myself brief so of course I didn't include the irrelevant stuff. If you want to repeat something you have said, you cite it. I saw no reason to do so as the quote is easily accessible to everyone :P. I don't give a shit about the picture of me, I can prove it by calling you a dumb ass :P. The irony is that I am way too nice to you, you deserve much more ridicule :P. If you ask me something, I will respond. What is happening here is that you refuse to respond to my question about if PragerU always tells the truth 100% of the time. Why is that?
    1
  80.  @ChipperWilliams  I literally never said "But you said!" :P Not sure how you think I am the snowflake here, it is you who cannot deal with the video being pure crap and PragerU not speaking the truth 100% of the time. It is you who whine like a little bitch because I called you Mr. Sheeple. Now that is a snowflake if I ever saw one. Peace out, troglodyte.
    1
  81. @islanti we are not listening to the democrats, we are listening to the scientists. There are no people that are as neutral as scientists. They just enjoy figuring out how things work.
    1
  82. ironically, I interpret Prager's stance on this as a great supporter for what he seems to be against. So I second "Dennis Prager's ignorance is alarming."
    1
  83. well said.
    1
  84. it is indeed difficult to choose side, but the extreme left is easier to live with than the extreme right.
    1
  85. counter culture is great, but it has to be true.
    1
  86. he is not blind, he just lies for money.
    1
  87. so let the climate scientists lead then.
    1
  88.  @garetclaborn  relative see level change for Manhattan is totally relevant when we examine the statement "human settlements always move due to nature and even at 1 inch per year families will move on their own with no problem. of course the sea level change rate is not even close to that" How reliable is the Dutch model in the long run?
    1
  89.  @garetclaborn  if you don't think it is relevant, I wonder what you mean when you say "last time i checked human settlements always move due to nature and even at 1 inch per year families will move on their own with no problem. of course the sea level change rate is not even close to that". How do you move a skyscraper? If you want to argue the merits of the Dutch system, "last time i checked human settlements always move due to nature and even at 1 inch per year families will move on their own with no problem. of course the sea level change rate is not even close to that" is irrelevant. The Dutch system works now of course, that you cannot dispute. Will it work in the future, with climate change? That is a more interesting question. Will the Dutch model withstand the future challenges? This you have not addressed.
    1
  90.  @garetclaborn  you have clarified nothing, you have just repeated yourself. Surely you must know the difference.
    1
  91.  @garetclaborn  attention? are you kidding me? no one but you and me care what happens here. I just wanted to engage in a rational discussion with someone with a different understanding than I have. Are you telling me I should not?
    1
  92.  @garetclaborn  Which is why I didn't bring it up. I just picked a heavily populated place to highlight that you cannot move a skyscraper (not that I think you think, but to show the irrelevance of your comment about human settlements moving). You brought in another idea into the discussion. My question is not about the specific place, so I think it is possible to answer my question anyway, I just chose something concrete to make the discussion less vague. I would however argue that dealing with the water level issue becomes even more important if we have places sinking as it is. Maybe there aren't many places that do, but it hardly makes it less important. To show you how honest I am, let's chance city. Let's talk about Stockholm, another city by the water. How are they supposed to deal with the rising sea levels?
    1
  93.  @garetclaborn  so you don't want a genuine conversation?
    1
  94.  @garetclaborn  if you knew anything about how to have a constructive dialogue you would not say that. It is a shame, but honestly not that surprising.
    1
  95.  @garetclaborn  character assassinatio? what? please quote me where I did. My point was never shown invalid. That is what the dialogue is for, to examine our statements. You don't show it is invalid by saying so, you have to make a thorough logical argumentation, based on honest interpretation. You have answered, but we have to examine the answers to know if they are valid ones. You are doing everything you can to not engage in a genuine conversation with me. Why? Instead of talking trash about me, how about you actually practice what you preach and engage with me, in a genuine conversation?
    1
  96.  @garetclaborn  I think it is pathetic that you shy away from having a genuine conversation at the same time as you claim you want to have one. What a hypocrite. I am under no obligation to accept hypocrites, and the adult thing to do is to condemn them.
    1
  97.  @garetclaborn  everyone who reads this can see that I time and time again try to have a genuine conversation but you time and time again try to avoid it. You are the one running away, I haven't given up on having a genuine conversation yet. I am using the "genuine conversation" phrasing as that was what you said I didn't want to have, so I am here declaring that it is absolutely what I want to have. Let's talk. My agenda is to recognize the truth whatever it is. Is yours?
    1
  98.  @garetclaborn  yet again I am disappointed by your side of the fence, and you wonder why you have so little support for your ideas? As soon as a person want to engage in a rational discussion this is how you behave? smh
    1
  99.  @garetclaborn  lies? c'mon dude. Is this how you rationalize your behavior? I would benefit from man made global warming being a hoax, and so would you. Why do you give up? Don't you want people to see things as you?
    1
  100.  @BiggMo  considering propaganda defined as "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view." it fits very well. Misleading information, check. Promoting a political cause, check.
    1
  101. like the ones that wants to "save us from the climate activists"
    1
  102. so what do you think a person who are done with themselves should do to combat climate change?
    1
  103. honestly, I kind of look forward to it.
    1
  104. and that is why Warren has a great grassroots movement.
    1
  105. it is because it has happened that we know that humans can make it happen.
    1
  106.  Verbalised Resonance  With all the changes through history, if climate would have been the same nothing humans do today could ever change it. Think about it logically.
    1
  107. some problems are indeed to big to solve by slow improvement of everyone's moral character.
    1
  108. I am sure you hate your family then :P. Collectivism starts with your family and friends.
    1
  109. It is indeed not common you see BS called out like this from the actual audience rather than external dissidents.
    1
  110. why did you write that instead of working on your own moral character?
    1
  111. he has a point, but I agree with your point as well.
    1
  112. it doesn't have to be. It is stored energy. If she didn't eat meat, it is efficiently stored energy.
    1
  113. the ciimate denier video is a better example :)
    1
  114. what are your plans for combating climate change?
    1
  115. The fact that I dont know how many accusations are proved to be wrong is evidence enough to know that we have not had an actual discussion about how frequent false claims are made.
    1
  116. how do you define "beachfront property"?
    1
  117. not sure what people you see, but the climate activists I meet are doing what you ask them of.
    1
  118.  @stevenwiederholt7000  that was not the questions you asked, you asked "Have you stopped driving a car? Have you changed how you heat/cool your home? Do you buy food that is shipped in from another part of the country or another country?"
    1
  119.  @stevenwiederholt7000  no one is arguing we should like like people did in those times. Straw man much? Is that the best you have?
    1
  120.  @stevenwiederholt7000  tell me how many environmentalists that think we should get rid of solar, wind and hydro power? You need to get rid of your straw man argumentation, as that just dumbs you down.
    1
  121. so what will you do to combat climate change?
    1
  122.  @Arkata  you, as youtube would add his name if I reply to him. You don't know it works like that?
    1
  123.  @Arkata  you do that on youtube? Must be really annoying given the names some people have... This is not about me, it is about you. What do you believe and how do you act based on that belief?
    1
  124.  @Arkata  it is about you as you said what he said was smart, so I am curious how you think about his point in regards to the topic of the video. Lol, you are too focused on me to have understood Jordan's point. If you have to speculate, I would suggest that you assume I am a reasonable person, as in not anti-science.
    1
  125. no one ignores this. The funny thing is that it is the scientists you don't trust that told you that the "earth's climate has always changed".
    1
  126. I don't even interpret Jordan as speaking against activism, if anything it is more of an endorsement.
    1
  127. are you against abortions?
    1
  128. you know you have very little to say to push back against action combating climate change if you angle this video as "Jordan Peterson Educates Climate Activist".
    1
  129. like the entire right wing and how they want to control others so they can't enter the us?
    1
  130.  @JasonPhillips30  why not? You don't think controlling who passes into a piece of land is controlling people?
    1
  131. Hey, at least now they accept that things are getting warmer. You didn't see that 15 years ago.
    1
  132.  william III  like Prager blaming the left in this video? :P
    1
  133.  william III  that does not refute my argument.
    1
  134.  william III  the right indulges in the blame game a lot.
    1
  135. the question should be if she thinks she will be better off than her grand kids.
    1
  136. maybe she knows something he doesn't know?
    1
  137.  @ThatsBitchassness  how so? You don't think she knows anything he doesn't? Do you think I know something he doesn't?
    1
  138.  @ThatsBitchassness  but that was not the question.
    1
  139. what if it was? how do you know she doesn't have her life in order?
    1
  140. so how will you personally change your life so that you won't contribute to climate change?
    1