brianary
@brianary@lemmy.zip
- Comment on Resources 2 weeks ago:
I can tell you’re really proud of these replies, but I’m afraid they don’t actually make sense.
You were hoping to prove a logical implication (if P then Q), but you feel it was disproved since the premise didn’t happen. However, “not P” doesn’t actually prove anything about the implication.
Anyway, no one is really accomplishing anything constructive here. Good luck!
- Comment on Resources 2 weeks ago:
If it’s not compelling enough for you to read it to support your position, why would I read it?
- Comment on Resources 2 weeks ago:
So you didn’t read it either? Interesting.
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
It looks to me like that same feeling toward any population concerns are the clear sentiment of the op, even if they don’t state it so openly. I guess you didn’t see that? No sense trying to beat this to death, we’re seeing different things.
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
It’s a diversion to another topic. No thanks.
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
Why are you asking me?
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
I thought maybe someone was capable of answering a reasonable question to support their position, assuming they had already read the article. Apparently I have to do that work for them?
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
Not everyone has equally arable land.
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
It’s not my job to make your point. You don’t get free labor.
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
Why?
- Comment on the wolves inside me 3 weeks ago:
This is Crazy Jane from Doom Patrol.
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
Does this assume instant, frictionless transportation of goods?
- Comment on Resources 3 weeks ago:
Antinatalism is a strawman slur against anyone that questions the viability of infinite growth.