Jonathan Safran Foer — best-selling creator of “Everything Is Illuminated,” “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close,” “Here I Am,” and his forthcoming guide, “We Are The Weather” — joins Ben to debate local weather change, environmentalism, activism, averting catastrophe, manufacturing facility farming, addressing extremism, and far more. Date: 08-11-2019
Consensus doesn’t a reality make.
Jonathan is absolutely good at attempting to get folks to confide in the concept of agreeing with him by flattering them. This dude would fully have his approach with President Trump.
@alex-marble-980997471 I’d agree, the comparisons made between the upfront menace of conflict is starkly completely different the approaching doom of one thing thats immeasurable and for that matter inevitable.
he forgot he is an enormous cuck.
Agreed, I hear that “97%” lie spewed out and I hit the mute or flip the channel. That form of alarmist B.S. is why it is about not possible to have a rational dialogue on local weather for the foreseeable future. Maybe we will attempt once more in 20 years to speak it over, when the icecaps are STILL there, when the oceans have not risen, when the polar bears are nonetheless consuming out of the trash dumps in Alaska… But for now there is no level in participating the left on this subject.
“97% of scientists” is pure Bullsh*t. There are hundreds of thousands of ” scientists” who work in lots of fields. Nobody has polled ALL “scientists”. Ben, it’s best to have known as out this nonsense. My good friend is a ” scientist” who works within the medical analysis area; she has zero credentials to render an opinion on the problem of local weather change.
His level on house entrance efforts was additionally unfaithful, the inventory piles produced from rationing in WWII weren’t wanted. The level of those was unification in a typical aim between governemnt and residents
Comment by GWS
Lost me at 97% of Scientists . . .
This is the purpose the place he fully loses creditability by his incapacity to be an energetic listener.
Ah…it simply obtained awkward.
By utilizing the statistic of “97% of scientists seem to agree on” is totally deceptive. The IPCC examine used was considered based on manipulated knowledge factors. It seems his intentions are good, however his method is counter to what’s mentioned within the interview.