Americans are so fucking dumb, that they can't read and interpret properly even a simple two-dimensional chart. — god must be atheist

It also seems there are people that struggle to read surrounding captions...that graph was responding to this:

Donald: "the US is in the midst of an economic boom the likes of which the World has never seen before". — ssu

Surely it 100% refutes this claim?? Sometimes these simple two dimensional charts can get tricky :grimace:

And for one more note...I don't think SSU is American...? Sweden or Finland maybe...?

As I said. Xi Jingping could argue that the economic growth that China has seen now is "likes of which the World has never seen before". The US growth spurt with similar rapid growth happened in the end of the 19th Century, so that's for economic historians to argue has it been seen already or not. Yet this hardly matters with Trump. Trump uses Trump talk and starting from certain crowd sizes that people remember well, one should remember that it's just Trump talking.

That witless twit Prince Charles flew 16,000 miles in private jets in eleven days before posing for a photo with Greta. That's what turns people against the fake moral posturing of virtue-signaling environmentalism. I would never say fuck you to a 16 year old (unlike those lefties who said that and worse to the Covington kids); but to a vapid preening celebrity like Prince Charlie, I would.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7929735/Prince-Charles-flew-16-000-miles-just-11-days-proudly-posing-Greta-Thunberg-Davos.html

Jumping in way late (yet again). The problem I see with Greta and her like is the false application of our cultural parable of the "Emperor's New Clothes". The candor of an ignorant child can be powerful when it cuts to the heart of a question no-one wants to voice. But on a question that is being debated at high volume and intensity, a child's voice is and can only be a voice of naive ignorance. I'm sorry, but she's being used by her handlers to make emotional pleas in a subject that requires the height of passionless objective analysis.

Do the older reader/posters here recall the Pons-Fleishman debacle over cold fusion? Because the science had such intensely important sociopolitical significance it got emotional and the science suffered. That was minor compared to the current "climate crisis" debate.

No "Gretta" could shed any light on the truth in the debate over cold fusion. I see no merit in dragging the poor girl up in front of audiences for this debate either. It is a bald-faced attempt to distract from actual, scientifically based, debate. "If you disagree you must want to kick poor Gretta in the teeth" or some such horror. She's being used in an abusive way, even if it turns out for the "right reasons".

Personally I don't buy the whole of the asserted claims. I've never seen any legitimate claim with influence in the sociopolitical realm that didn't point out that "well it's bad for some reasons but it's good for others". The complete lack of even hypothetical benefits for the proposed effect make me suspect the motives of those making the claims. "Give me the power to prevent those horrible things that will happen to all of you, no matter who you are or where you live!"

[edit:] "In other words... Give Me Power!!!"
Look closely people!!!

I see no merit in dragging the poor girl up in front of audiences for this debate either. It is a bald-faced attempt to distract from actual, scientifically based, debate. — jambaugh

She's not getting involved in the scientific debate. She's involved in the political debate. She's making political demands and those opposed to her are doing so also. Only a handful of flat-earther's and paid for shills are still trying to debate the science.

A great turn out for Greta today in Bristol. Are you listening?

I'm not sure she's a serious or relevant 'activist' to begin with using any more serious or intellectual methodology in relation to the approximations, mathematical or otherwise and logical planning and goal setting as opposed to just a niave young person who managed to appear in the 6th grade reading level media and generate a popular buzz, negative or positive which appeals to the superstitious and media voyeurs of all "political' or "religious" persuasions. (I don't believe anyone is completely "immune from it either" no matter how rational they are or wish to be).

Regardless, these types of reactions are definitely absurd; I don't even blame "Trump" specifically or want a scapegoat, as opposed to the overall "political climate" in general.

(There enough sound scientific evidence that people have a natural tendency to act "tribalistic", irrational or aggressive under the right circumstances, whether political violence, sports violence, etc which goes beyond any simplistic, mass marketed 'left/right' paradigm that I don't care to case blame at a "side" or fan the flames on this one)