Downvotes seem to be as much emotionally driven as anything else. Also, there is the perpetual confusion between "I do not agree" and "This is not constructive"
I downvoted simply because it's a crappy article from a crappy "newspaper" that doesn't really add to the conversation.
I mean, look at this silliness:
"It is pretty damn obvious there are positive impacts of climate change, even though we are not always allowed to talk about them."
This quote comes right after talking about them, so what's this idea that they're not allowed to? Ridiculous. It's a political editorial, and not even a good one, masquerading as a news article.
I got downvoted just for asking someone to explain the reasoning behind the report, given the acknowledged (by the IPCC!) flat-spot we're experiencing.
This seems to be a hard issue for people to discuss rationally.
Comments
The other side: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/27/un-climate-a...
Wow, downvoted for simply posting a report on a dissenting opinion from a former IPCC review panel member. WTF?
Downvotes seem to be as much emotionally driven as anything else. Also, there is the perpetual confusion between "I do not agree" and "This is not constructive"
I downvoted simply because it's a crappy article from a crappy "newspaper" that doesn't really add to the conversation.
I mean, look at this silliness:
"It is pretty damn obvious there are positive impacts of climate change, even though we are not always allowed to talk about them."
This quote comes right after talking about them, so what's this idea that they're not allowed to? Ridiculous. It's a political editorial, and not even a good one, masquerading as a news article.
I got downvoted just for asking someone to explain the reasoning behind the report, given the acknowledged (by the IPCC!) flat-spot we're experiencing.
This seems to be a hard issue for people to discuss rationally.