One can accept facts and still not care. That is pretty much what I do. Given the choice between the politician A - OMG we are all going to die of global warming unless you give us all your money, or politician B - climate change is a hoax, I'm going to choose the politician that best represents my interests on other things. If that is B then so be it. No pun intended.

One uses more hyperbole. Both are profoundly dumb.

Sound great on the surface hey? Unfortunately the two main parties are the only ones that ever hold power, and they are very polarized. If one of those main parties does not get a majority, they look to the smaller parties to prop them up in return for advancing their agenda. This is what has happened recently, the minority Liberal government was propped up by the NDP. In exchange their spending on the NDP wish list has doubled our national debt in just 8 years. You have a problem with cuts, we have a problem with unlimited and out of control government spending. While the whole DOGE thing is obviously a clown show, I'f not be averse at all to someone coming in and doing some massive cutting here. Government under the Liberals is an out of control monstrosity poking it's face into every aspect of everyone's live. Pretty sure exactly zero Trump voters would trade for our nanny state even today.

This video never loses relevance.

1959 Chevrolet Bel Air vs. 2009 Chevrolet Malibu IIHS crash test

I'd agree that is stupid, but if they are representing their electorate that is how it is supposed to work. I don't actually know if the electorate actually believes those things, or if they just don't care about the subject at all so it does not matter what the politician says. Perhaps they are tired of being told to care and think it is a good repudiation if nothing else. I don't think offshore wind kills whales in significant numbers but it is hilarious to see the same sort of FUD tactics the anti-nuclear/mining/pipeline folks have used for ages being used against them now. They are all exactly the same kind of people.

They represent very different things. They are also both batshit crazy. Two sides of the same coin as it were. It's painful listening to either of them speak and I'd be equally embarrassed to be a constituent of either of them. Unfortunately...

...we have batshit crazy ones on both the right and left here in Canada too. And we are rapidly becoming just as divided as the US for many of the same reasons. As I mentioned in another post on this topic Trump is having the effect of hiding some of that division temporarily, but it will be back bigger than ever in due course.

Also probably the only thing that could have a worse drag coefficient.

Mmmm, bacon!!!

Considering how often their data gets "corrected" I can only assume it is possibly, maybe close to accurate. Interpretation is a bit more subjective. Policymakers need to account for things like people being able to afford feed and house their families today, while scientists don't have to consider such things. Probably why they make shit politicians.

As a Canadian I think I'm pretty objective looking from the outside. I can totally see why Trump was elected. That you can't is exactly the crux of the problem. And if you think AOC et al is not every bit as much of a whackjob as MTG et all you are not being very subjective yourself.

Yeah, there are so many people now we need to be more like a big ant colony with no individual agency lest someone do something bad. That seems to be the standard left wing talking point. I think I prefer the abandoned cars.

Motorsport does not need bringing back, it is more popular than ever. Formula E is boring. Formula One is seriously discussing a return to bigger gas engines now that they are all powered by e-fuels.

I've driven 250cc twin 2-stroke shifter carts around a road track that are much the same, except they smell nicer. They could do lap times close to a Formula Atlantic car back in the day. Fastest thing I have ever driven actually.

Certainly government will remain the biggest enemy. That part will likely never change.

Could not be that old. The gas furnace I just replaced was made before controller boards were a thing. They don't make em like they used to.

It's not science per se, no. And activist scientists are bad for science IMHO but that is another discussion. Policy should be left to policymakers. Scientists are free to run for office. Some of them even do. Voters can decide directly if they want to buy the solutions they are selling, it does not get much better than that. And if people vote for policymakers who say we don't care, that is a fair choice too.

I think you equate an entire large middle ground with a vocal fringe. They do the same of course. There really are zealots on both sides of every issue, people just tend to notice them more on the other side.

I'm not sure that is actually true. Few people argue climate never changes. Rate and causation are not really relevant if you don't consider it a government problem in any case, so no need to cite anything, and that is what this article is about, the citations.

Agreed. It's hard to come back and discuss how something can be done better with all the enemies you made the first time though. That too is a common problem.