La Vagabonde as celebrities

[OloteleMtn]

But they are so much smarter than us, why can't we understand that?! They know what is best for us, it is to be like them!

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Haywoods

There is no need to insult people because they have a different view to yours !!!!

I haven't insulted anyone and my comments weren't because we have differing views. I'm sorry you feel that way.

[Haywoods]

Originally Posted by tp12

I haven't insulted anyone and my comments weren't because we have differing views. I'm sorry you feel that way.

Well as a middle aged white man, I found your post to be Ageist, racist and sexist !! I don't know what you think you have to do to insult somebody !!

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Haywoods

Well as a middle aged white man, I found your post to be Ageist, racist and sexist !! I don't know what you think you have to do to insult somebody !!

I was pointing out a profile of person who is likely to deny climate science and feel anger towards Greta Thunberg. It is not ageist, racist nor sexist to do so. Nor is it insulting.

[ol1970]

Although I haven’t watched one of their videos in years I have zero issues with a couple that came from nothing, started doing something they loved, recognized an opportunity, then worked their asses off to get what they’ve got.

Just because they receive compensation in a different way than you and me doesn’t take away from what they’ve accomplished. They provide a service, no different than anyone who earns a living, they just figured out how to do it doing something cool.

That being said I certainly wouldn’t want to have the pressure of constantly producing new videos while out enjoying sailing, but it’s certainly better than earning money in a cubicle.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by ol1970

Although I haven’t watched one of their videos in years I have zero issues with a couple that came from nothing, started doing something they loved, recognized an opportunity, then worked their asses off to get what they’ve got.

Just because they receive compensation in a different way than you and me doesn’t take away from what they’ve accomplished. They provide a service, no different than anyone who earns a living, they just figured out how to do it doing something cool.

That being said I certainly wouldn’t want to have the pressure of constantly producing new videos while out enjoying sailing, but it’s certainly better than earning money in a cubicle.

In their latest video Elayna talks about that pressure. She's feeling it because they've been unable to sail and therefore produce their normal content. It's definitely a real thing.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by tp12

I was pointing out a profile of person who is likely to deny climate science and feel anger towards Greta Thunberg. It is not ageist, nor sexist to do so. Nor is it insulting.

It's SOP for alarmists, go for ad hominem when you don't have the facts.


"middle aged white men, right wing with authoritarian tendencies, who rail against Greta and climate science and it's no surprise that you fit this category" ?
If you hadn't got four out of your seven generalisations wrong, I would have felt insulted

[tp12]

Originally Posted by StuM

It's SOP for alarmists, go for ad hominem when you don't have the facts.


"middle aged white men, right wing with authoritarian tendencies, who rail against Greta and climate science and it's no surprise that you fit this category" ?
If you hadn't got four out of your seven generalisations wrong, I would have felt insulted

There's plenty of information to support this. Do some reading on the subject and you'll see. Some interesting stuff on psychology today, for example. Once you realise this is true you'll realise it's not an ad hominem to talk about it.

[Van Der Beek]

Originally Posted by tp12

Nah, I'm not but I'm not going to get into a debate with a climate science denier.

Who says StuM denies we have climate scientists? You're beginning to come across as retarded as Greta. What's next, calling him a climate denier? If so, when has he ever (or anyone else for that matter) denied we have a climate?

Heck, were I am right now the climate changes FOUR times a year, four times in a 12 month period. We usually refer to these changes as....seasons. Or if you wanna go old school English...year tide.

Originally Posted by tp12

It's usually, but not limited to, middle aged white men, right wing with authoritarian tendencies, who rail against Greta and climate science and it's no surprise that you fit this category.

Where have StuM expressed authoritarian tendencies, let's start there.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Van Der Beek

Who says StuM denies we have climate scientists? You're beginning to come across as retarded as Greta. What's next, calling him a climate denier? If so, when has he ever (or anyone else for that matter) denied we have a climate?

Heck, were I am right now the climate changes FOUR times a year, four times in a 12 month period. We usually refer to these changes as....seasons. Or if you wanna go old school English...year tide.

You've either misunderstood my post or you're deliberately misconstruing it. Either way it's a rather silly response.

[Van Der Beek]

Originally Posted by tp12

You've either misunderstood my post or you're deliberately misconstruing it. Either way it's a rather silly response.

I suggest you go back and re-read your own posts.

Here, let me help you.

Originally Posted by tp12

Nah, I'm not but I'm not going to get into a debate with a climate science denier.

You were debating StuM, here you called him a climate science denier.

Originally Posted by tp12

It's usually, but not limited to, middle aged white men, right wing with authoritarian tendencies, who rail against Greta and climate science and it's no surprise that you fit this category.

...and here's the authoritarian part.


Nope, nothing's been misconstrued or misunderstood. Your own words quoted for you.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by tp12

There's plenty of information to support this. Do some reading on the subject and you'll see. Some interesting stuff on psychology today, for example.

Lewandowsky and Cook again?

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Van Der Beek

I suggest you go back and re-read your own posts, nothing's been misconstrued or misunderstood.

Here, let me help you.



You were debating StuM, here you called him a climate science denier.

Yes, I did. None of that is relevant to your post. It looks like you don't understand what a climate science denier is.

[hzcruiser]

Originally Posted by stark

Ok, so am I alone here?

Pretty much, yes. Just switch channels, mate. And chill.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by StuM

Lewandowsky and Cook again?

I haven't read the conspiracy theory handbook. But thanks for bringing my attention to it as it's yet more evidence to support my earlier points. In searching for it I noticed quite a few conspiracy sites and climate science deniers moaning about his work.