False choice: misunderstanding causal relationships

The context here is that the reply is trying to say that climate change cannot be the cause of increasing severity of wild fires because 80% of the fires are caused by humans.

However, these are not mutually exclusive, as “PDX_Info” would like you to believe. Here’s why:

There are three types of causes:

  • Sufficient – guarantees the effect.
  • Necessary – required to trigger the effect (but does not guarantee the effect).
  • Contributing – neither necessary nor sufficient, but makes the effect more likely.

Now that we have an understanding of causal relationships, let’s examine the increase in fire activity and what kinds of cause humans and climate change are.

The presence of humans does not guarantee a fire. So, it’s not a sufficient cause.
The presence of humans is not required for a fire, so it is not a necessary cause.
Humans do all sorts of things that make fires more likely, so we found it!
Humans are a contributing cause.

The presence of climate change does not guarantee a fire, so it is not a sufficient cause.
The presence of climate change is not required for a fire, so it is not a necessary cause.
Climate change makes fires more likely, so we found it!
Climate change is a contributing cause.

One important thing to know about contributing causes is that they never act alone.
In the case of fire activity, it is almost certainly true that both humans and climate change are contributing causes.

However, when it comes to increased fire activity, climate change clearly has a larger impact. We can demonstrate that its contributing effect is increasing over time.
The human cause is less clear. I have not seen the analysis over time, and it’s what’s needed to claim they are a cause.

The irony, of course, is that humans cause climate change, so they accidentally happen to be right. 😂

Biological False Dichotomy, Lacking Evidence, and Misunderstanding Foreign Cultures

This boxer is physically (morphologically) female.

Genetically, she is intersex (not male).

The conversation about how this is managed in sports is complicated. Some context:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_verification_in_sports#Chromosome_testing

This boxer is also from Algeria, which is not famous for it’s trans rights. Homosexuality is illegal in Algeria.
Algeria has condemned the attacks on this fighter.

Reality Denial: Russia Didn’t Interfere In The 2016 & 2020 Elections

To think that Russia didn’t interfere and won’t interfere is wild and requires a frightening disconnection from reality.

Seven people were found guilty of aiding Russia, and five of them went to prison. ALL of them were in Trump’s inner circle.

https://time.com/5556331/mueller-investigation-indictments-guilty-pleas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections

Math Is Not A Strong-suit

First, the cited study here is garbage from a well-known pay-to-play journal. They also list some significant limitations in their study that all point toward the 2-dose+ numbers being unreliable. But that’s not why I’m here.

I’m here because these clowns don’t know the difference between a 37% difference in life expectancy (that would be approximately 30 years) and a 37% difference in the change in life expectancy, which is relative to the change in the control group. If the control group’s change in life expectancy is one year, then the change in life expectancy would be 0.37 years. Quite a difference!

Not only do they have shitty sources, they also can’t do maths!

Expertise is Nothing, Publicly Broadcast Your Stupidity Freely

Questioning the science is how experts in their field privately start doing science. They then keep their questions to themselves until they have answers – something they can replicate, demonstrate, and publish.

Questioning science at large is not a viable “opinion”.

Non-experts who pretend they have the understanding and context to question any and all science are really fucking dumb.

California is Utopian

They must have gotten caught up in their own doublespeak.

I thought the misuse of “utopian” was a misquote, but it’s actually from the source. The best part is that it’s then quoted without realization or correction.

They obviously have quality editing.

Nonexistent WHO Council


The WHO doesn’t have a eugenics council and never has (obviously). This quote is entirely fabricated.