In your example you would be saying you want apple pie because it gives you all these vitamins. Then when told apple pie is not the answer and its actually kale you want them you immediately pivot to a different for ending up at apple pie.
Its the floating table. You knock all the legs of their argument down and their belief only gets stronger. They are not switched on.
>In your example you would be saying you want apple pie because it gives you all these vitamins.
No. I just want it. That's the part you don't seem to get. It's a preference. There's no reason or rationale that you can attempt to short-circuit with any fact.
>ts the floating table. You knock all the legs of their argument down and
They're not arguing with you. They're attempting to tell you that this is their preference. That they won't change their mind. Sometimes they're bad at it, can't articulate it. Other times they say this perfectly clearly... doesn't much matter, because you're not listening. You hear what you want to hear (like above, with "you think the apple pie has vitamins!").
>and their belief only gets stronger. They are not switched on.
It's not belief. That's actually frustration. And a little bit of spite.
Do you happen to know the video? I'm noticing a lot of channels putting out these history videos that tell a very anti us narrative because they leave out half the story.
If I were to fire a gun randomly at an apartment building and kill people, but my intent was to only do property damage, does that mean I didn't commit murder? Intent does not matter when the outcome is people dying.
Thats different to a military conflict where you are legally allowed to target and kill people you believe to be enemy combatants. Its up to Iran to protect their civilans at the end of the day. Im not even sure this should be prosecuted as a war crime since Iran does not participate in the international law of armed conflict.
> Im not even sure this should be prosecuted as a war crime since Iran does not participate in the international law of armed conflict.
Wow. International treaties do not free you of your obligations on the basis of other side of war commitment to them.
I don’t even need to check if the statement is true, because it absolutely is irrelevant.
Unintentional double tap, followed by highest level accusations of Iran bombing its own school with Tomahawk missiles bought somewhere, sounds very plausible.
Its annoying because thats what people want from small business but as a contractor you're usually working so you have to do your trade and be available to take calls like a receptionist. Better if they'd just send an email or use the online booking form.
I'm open to leaving voicemails. If I hear "hello, this is Bob from Bob's Concrete, I'm on a job leave a detailed message and I will get back to you", that guy is likely to get my job, even if he is a bit more.
The usual thing is to point at China because China is a huge place with a huge population and so as it industrialized it uses a lot of power and emits lots of CO2.
This made plenty of sense ten years ago, when for a smaller country you could compare their entire CO2 footprint to China's annual growth and ask why bother. But increasingly while China is still huge these comparisons look worse for even medium-sized countries unless they're actually on a sensible path. China is growing more slowly and importantly mostly by using more renewables and electrifying, so the comparison looks more uncomfortable.
The comparison with China was never very good, as thinking in terms of emissions per country is useless. Per capita emissions would be much more relevant, and even then you'd have to take into account that Chinese factories produce their goods mainly for Western markets.
Per captia emissions is the most useless stat and by the way China's per captia emissions are high now so update that talking point. As for the western market argument, governments are responsible for managing their emissions not private companies. The reason China makes goods for the western market is because the western markets introduced legislation to try and reduce emissions while China did not.
reply