them scientist a half lie

To begin, I should say that I ain't no climate change denier. I ain't no Trump supporter. I am just a confused citizen. I am confused about why yall can accept that scientist be mad shady with they research so they can get published

so they can get that moneeeyy

but then trip when climate change deniers claim scientist are lying about climate change.

How on one hand can you say scientists are a group of greedy assholes who be altering the results of they research for personal gain and then on another hand- when talking about climate change-you act like they upstanding individuals concerned with the fate of the world?

Yall act like climate change deniers are crazy when they be like, "Can we please stop acting like scientist are trustworthy? Can we please stop acting like their work hasn't been tainted by capitalist greed? Can we please stop acting like it's crazy for people to think scientist were lying results they came up with?"

My response is:


Maybe if scientist didn't lie about what be in our food, people would believe them when we talked about global climate change.

Maybe if scientist didn't lie about what medicine we can take, people would believe them when we talk about global climate change.

Maybe if scientist hadn't normalized lying about the implications of their research, people would believe them about global climate change.

I don't know. Maybe it's not just Trump supporters, capitalism, materialism, and the like that needs to take responsibility for climate change. Maybe scientist need to share blame in causing this mess. Maybe I am wrong but if they hadn't became little lying ass Tom's, people might believe them when they talked about climate change. Maybe, in this world that I am envisioning, it would be easier to do something about climate change.

I guess we will never know.

Look, I am not against scientists. I am thankful for all of their efforts and achievements they have made that actually benefits us.

I am just saying that before you clown climate change deniers for not believing scientist, come up with some type of criteria where we know which instances we can trust them or not. The way we be picking and choosing what scientists lie about is ridiculous. Maybe we should work on constructing criteria in a way that is honest, sensible, as non-biased as can be, that evaluate when and how we can trust scientist.

Now, I, like many will still critique the frack out of climate change deniers because I truly believe that their beliefs have catastrophic consequences. I just think, as a friend of mine's recently told me, we should ask ourselves, what possible experiences have they had that led them to this idea? If we do, we can mine that for ways to get them to perceive what you are saying as less opposed to them, and more on their side of things (Shout out to you Steve! #Rhetoric #Sophist).


Recent Posts

See All

humanities professors that dgaf

College teachers in the humanities teaching general courses: Your students are afraid that their kids won’t live a long life because of the climate change crisis. People are being beaten by the police

Created and managed by Taylor Tate

(281) 923-5301