zlacker

If you can't have an argument without becoming toxic, please abstain from commenting. We're discussing here and I literally put a disclaimer in the beginning of the comment saying I'm not pro fossil fuels usage.

>>travel+(OP)
What if he put a disclaimer in that he's not being toxic? Could he then continue commenting?

>>silver+03
So you want me to shut up just because I'm questioning common knowledge without being toxic to anyone?

>>travel+(OP)
> We're discussing here and I literally put a disclaimer in the beginning of the comment saying I'm not pro fossil fuels usage.

This disclaimer is not a free card to cast doubts on climate change science. Not being pro fossil fuels usage has nothing to do with questions about climate change science. The way you raise that disclaimer to doubt climate change science ? Well...

People have given you simple explanations you dismissed, I am giving you links to longer/harder explanations you are dismissing (I presume, since you don't follow on that).

If you think climate change science is wrong then bring up why you think so. "What if it's wrong" is rarely a useful basis by itself for a discussion on topics that have been studied in depths for decades.

>>travel+(OP)
You can lead a horse to water, but can't make it drink.

Of course you're going to upset people by "feigning" ignorance and ignoring the mountains of supporting evidence provided.

You don't get to play the role of an obstinate child and continually ask "yeah but why" then feign innocence while ignoring the supporting evidence you requested.

>>travel+U5
You aren't questioning common knowledge. You're not even bothering with the evidence that provide answers to your questions.

You are simply arguing for argument's sake.

>>travel+U5
I asked a question, I did not tell you to shut up.

>>travel+(OP)
He’s not acting toxic. You just proved to have a thin skin.