@First-light

My problem isn't with the idea of a changing climate - as @Stigma noted, that's a given to anyone with an IQ over room temperature. Where I take issue is with the political agenda trying to stop us all driving effective gasoline vehicles, stop eating meat and generally adopt a dystopian lifestyle medieval serfs would find intolerable - as well as with the religious ideology that's built up around that, as you noted.

Also, per your last couple sentences, that was precisely what I was referring to by referencing the Medieval Warm Period above. That shit ain't taught in schools anymore, or wasn't when I was going through it, because it totally fucks up the narrative. It's part of why Greenland is named Greenland. Granted, that was also a PR move on Erik the Red's part, but when he and his crew were exploring the North Atlantic in the late 10th century it was actually a fair bit warmer than it is today, leading to more of Greenland being habitable and arable than is currently the case.

@WokeDown

Simulations and models are only as good as the data upon which they're built. The climate is such a vast and complicated system no model could ever hope to accurately predict its behavior beyond about a week - which is not coincidentally why most weather forecasts don't go much past that.

The climate change narrative, being driven by ideological hysterics and special interests rather than science, routinely ignores data that contradicts that narrative in the interest of pushing a political agenda. Remember the hockey stick graph? How about the Medieval Warm Period? Or even just treating atmospheric carbon dioxide as a leading rather than a lagging indicator.

I'd say most climate science is crap but that would be giving it too much credit. Not only is it built on bad data, it's generally also unfalsifiable in any practical sense - which makes it simply not science.

@Typo-MAGAshiv

While there's zero evidence that any woman quoted in there is slutty or a single mom or even unreasonable/entitled (it actually reads like a legit lament from their perspective), I think it lends itself well to a discussion of how feminism coupled with affirmative action keeping men down to help women up has led to this situation.

Agreed. We obviously don't want to stray too much from the central theme of the forum but it's useful sometimes to take more of a bird's eye view of things.

There are a lot of (particularly younger) women who haven't been run through by Chad and Tyrone and genuinely believe they want a good guy but, because of the effects of feminism on the wider culture, they either behave in a way that drives good men away without realizing that's what they're doing, or enough damage has been done for most men to conclude the juice and worth the squeeze and they've simply missed the boat due to being born too late to catch it.

It's unfortunate and ain't fair to them, but neither was it fair to all the young men born into a culture that hates and criticizes them simply for being what they are. The state of things ain't these women's fault but it is their responsibility. Men have set about fixing the problem in the only way we reasonably can - by simply walking away and starving the beast women set loose upon us. If women want to hasten that resolution it's on them to put the monster back in its cage.

@polishknight

@polishknight

It's a bit outside what's normally discussed, but I'll allow it

Rule 5, in its entirety, but with what makes this post fit in bold:

Submissions must show a woman who is looking for commitment while also either complaining about jerks or promiscuity, needing her kids provided for, being entitled or unreasonable, or complaining that she "can't find a decent guy".

While there's zero evidence that any woman quoted in there is slutty or a single mom or even unreasonable/entitled (it actually reads like a legit lament from their perspective), I think it lends itself well to a discussion of how feminism coupled with affirmative action keeping men down to help women up has led to this situation.

It therefore fits rule 5, and doesn't have to wait for the weekend.

Side note: the archive.ph link cut off the bottom of the article. I recommend using archive.is instead, or that textise one you linked is fine (though it's preferable to see it with pictures, etc)

CC: @moorekom, @lurkerhasarisen, @woodsmoke, @goodmansaysfuckyou, @houseoftolstoy, @Impressive-Cricket-8, @deeplydisturbed, @Land_of_the_losers, @Kevin32 (did I miss anyone recently active?)