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