Your alcohol analogy might be just the key to get through to the sceptics. The good time now and hangover later just last a lot longer.
Agreed. But, as you have correctly pointed out in past posts, the "skeptics" with an agenda will remain "unconvinced", so to speak. :evil4:
We all agree that MKing, Palloy, Snowleapard, Alan, Ashvin, etc,
et al are not stupid. So, low IQ is no excuse for being biosphere math challenged.
We all agree that they support incremental measures, rather than drastic ones, to address the environmental problems.
We all agree that they, even if they aren't biologists or medical doctors, can read scientific journals and watch videos by credentialed climate scientists.
So, the excuse, often repeated by some of the above luminaries, that "they don't know that much about biology or climate science" does not hold water.
Having an agenda to downplay the existential threat does (see shoe sizes
).
UB, I recommend you save his image. It might come in handy when you are debating prevaricating forks.
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,5598.msg85816.html#msg85816