What a relief

[Gracchus]

"Tu quoque" is Latin for "You also" and addresses the person making the argument by pointing out hypocrisy or some perceived personality flaw rather than addressing the argument.

 

[AV1611VET]

This logical fallacy is known as "Tu quoque".

Thank you.

Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

 

[Gracchus]

Is this also called "Reverse revealed truth"?

No, logic is a branch of mathematics, which deals with absolute conclusions and making predictions reached by following certain rules, based on factual observations and testable hypotheses and premises which is the accepted scientific method. The scientific method is trusted because it is testable and verifiable. It got us to the moon and eradicated smallpox, which thousands of years of Christian theology never did or could. Scientific knowledge is not revealed truth from on high, it is truth that groups of the physically weakest great apes have refined from millions of man-hours (and woman-hours) of hard exacting and repeatedly examined and tested work. Very few "theologians" could chip flint.

 

[Postvieww]

It ought to be a group effort...that is "IF" we experienced God's Creation as sacred. The sad part from my perspective is that from what I gather from you, that's something Christians will not do.

I have no problem with people being responsible but government mandates such as taking gas stoves, talk of air-conditioner restrictions, forcing electric cars that the public at large does not want, not to mention the added cost of said cars and environmental impact of electric battery production and disposal, it is technology that is not yet ready for prime time. Trying to control the food supply promoting bugs over meat. Demonizing nuclear energy for unsustainable alternatives such as solar and wind. No problem with solar and wind but they cannot meet the demand. The governmental involvement in this issue is not about the planet it is about control period.

 

[USincognito]

I have no problem with people being responsible but government mandates such as taking gas stoves, talk of air-conditioner restrictions, forcing electric cars that the public at large does not want, not to mention the added cost of said cars and environmental impact of electric battery production and disposal, it is technology that is not yet ready for prime time. Trying to control the food supply promoting bugs over meat. Demonizing nuclear energy for unsustainable alternatives such as solar and wind. No problem with solar and wind but they cannot meet the demand. The governmental involvement in this issue is not about the planet it is about control period.

The problem with your list of grievances is that it's straight out of the Conservisphere and based largely on straw men, scare tactics and luddism.

 

[Postvieww]

The problem with your list of grievances is that it's straight out of the Conservisphere and based largely on straw men, scare tactics and luddism.

The problem with your assessment is you don’t address any of the issues which is a predictable response. My list is factual.

 

[USincognito]

The problem with your assessment is you don’t address any of the issues which is a predictable response. My list is factual.

Some people think that imitation is sincerest form of flattery, but personally I find the childish parroting of verbiage to show a lack of creativity.

Tell you what. Give me one example of someone in authority in the U.S. (or any country for that matter) "trying to control the food supply by promoting bugs over meat".

 

[Hans Blaster]

I have no problem with people being responsible but government mandates such as taking gas stoves, talk of air-conditioner restrictions, forcing electric cars that the public at large does not want, not to mention the added cost of said cars and environmental impact of electric battery production and disposal, it is technology that is not yet ready for prime time. Trying to control the food supply promoting bugs over meat. Demonizing nuclear energy for unsustainable alternatives such as solar and wind. No problem with solar and wind but they cannot meet the demand. The governmental involvement in this issue is not about the planet it is about control period.

Here's one problem with your rant:

It's largely about government mandates and involvement, yet you cite "demonizing nuclear energy". The US government doesn't demonize nuclear energy, it has a whole office about it:

Office of Nuclear Energy

with its own Assistant Secretary, who reports to the Undersecretary for Science and Innovation (along with other offices for fossil energy, science, renewable energy) and along side Undersecretaries for infrastructure and nuclear security. The all report to the Deputy Secretary and that person to the Secretary of Energy.

The budget for FY23 for the nuclear energy office is $1.7 B.

 

[Postvieww]

Tell you what. Give me one example of someone in authority in the U.S. (or any country for that matter) "trying to control the food supply by promoting bugs over meat".

I said: but government mandates such as taking gas stoves,

New York becomes the first state to ban natural gas stoves and furnaces in most new buildings | CNN

New York is the first state in the country to ban natural gas and other fossil fuels in most new buildings -- a major win for climate advocates, but a move that could spark pushback from fossil fuel interests.

www.cnn.com

New York State government mandating.

I said: talk of air-conditioner restrictions,

Biden admin's war on household appliances will cause higher prices, dirtier clothes and dishes, experts warn

The Biden administration's efforts to maximize energy efficiency of appliances through regulation could negatively impact consumers, according to experts and manufacturers.

www.foxnews.com

I said: forcing electric cars that the public at large does not want,

Biden signs order aiming for half of new vehicles to be electric by 2030

Automakers' expected quick transition from gas-burning cars and trucks to electric is a key part of the White House strategy to fight global warming.

www.nbcnews.com

California moves to accelerate to 100% new zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035 | California Air Resources Board

SACRAMENTO – The California Air Resources Board today approved the trailblazing Advanced Clean Cars II rule that sets California on a path to rapidly growing the zero-emission car, pickup truck and SUV market and deliver cleaner air and massive reductions in climate-warming pollution.

ww2.arb.ca.gov

I said: Trying to control the food supply promoting bugs over meat.

If we want to save the planet, the future of food is insects

Fried crickets on the school menu, milk made from fly larvae and mealworm bolognese for dinner? These are the environmentally friendly meals we can look forward to. Bon appetit!

www.theguardian.com

I said: Demonizing nuclear energy for unsustainable alternatives such as solar and wind.

'A new era': Germany quits nuclear power, closing its final three plants | CNN

Germany's final three nuclear power plants close their doors on Saturday, marking the end of the country's nuclear era that has spanned more than six decades.

www.cnn.com

You said: ("or any country for that matter") Thanks for recognizing this is not just a US problem


I said:The governmental involvement in this issue is not about the planet it is about control period.

I stand by the above statement it is accurate!

 

[Postvieww]

Here's one problem with your rant:

It's largely about government mandates and involvement, yet you cite "demonizing nuclear energy". The US government doesn't demonize nuclear energy, it has a whole office about it:

Office of Nuclear Energy

with its own Assistant Secretary, who reports to the Undersecretary for Science and Innovation (along with other offices for fossil energy, science, renewable energy) and along side Undersecretaries for infrastructure and nuclear security. The all report to the Deputy Secretary and that person to the Secretary of Energy.

The budget for FY23 for the nuclear energy office is $1.7 B.

Your rant has nothing to do with what I said!

 

[Hans Blaster]

Your rant has nothing to do with what I said!

Disagree. You said "government" and I see nothing in your post to suggest anything but the US government.

 

[Bradskii]

I said: but government mandates such as taking gas stoves,

New York becomes the first state to ban natural gas stoves and furnaces in most new buildings | CNN

New York is the first state in the country to ban natural gas and other fossil fuels in most new buildings -- a major win for climate advocates, but a move that could spark pushback from fossil fuel interests.

www.cnn.com

New York State government mandating.

They aren't being taken. They are just not being installed in new residential units. It says that in the linked article, so why did you say they are being taken?

I said: talk of air-conditioner restrictions,

Biden admin's war on household appliances will cause higher prices, dirtier clothes and dishes, experts warn

The Biden administration's efforts to maximize energy efficiency of appliances through regulation could negatively impact consumers, according to experts and manufacturers.

www.foxnews.com

Again, the linked article said that moves were being made to make appliances more efficient. Gee, who wants more efficiency, eh? What, cheaper to run? Oh, I see...

I said: forcing electric cars that the public at large does not want,

Biden signs order aiming for half of new vehicles to be electric by 2030

Automakers' expected quick transition from gas-burning cars and trucks to electric is a key part of the White House strategy to fight global warming.

www.nbcnews.com

California moves to accelerate to 100% new zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035 | California Air Resources Board

SACRAMENTO – The California Air Resources Board today approved the trailblazing Advanced Clean Cars II rule that sets California on a path to rapidly growing the zero-emission car, pickup truck and SUV market and deliver cleaner air and massive reductions in climate-warming pollution.

ww2.arb.ca.gov

The executive order is aiming for a 50% goal of zero admission vehicles by 2030. It is not binding and is largely symbolic. But I'd guess the car manufacturers would know what the public wants. So they are aiming for 40 - 50% themselves and GM will only be selling electric cars by 2035. Again, all from your linked article.

I said: Trying to control the food supply promoting bugs over meat.

If we want to save the planet, the future of food is insects

Fried crickets on the school menu, milk made from fly larvae and mealworm bolognese for dinner? These are the environmentally friendly meals we can look forward to. Bon appetit!

www.theguardian.com

Let me know when you can't buy a steak in the local deli. Talking of 'controlling the food supply' is a fantasy. Again, read your own linked article for details.

I said: Demonizing nuclear energy for unsustainable alternatives such as solar and wind.

'A new era': Germany quits nuclear power, closing its final three plants | CNN

Germany's final three nuclear power plants close their doors on Saturday, marking the end of the country's nuclear era that has spanned more than six decades.

www.cnn.com

Our state of Victoria supplies on average just over half the state's energy needs via renewables. They regularly hit 80% and at one point last year had surplus energy and sold it to other states. It's not hard. It just needs some commitment from the people making the decisions.

It seems that your own links dismantle your own arguments...

 

[Astrid]

The problem with your assessment is you don’t address any of the issues which is a predictable response. My list is factual.

It's a fact that it's a list

 

[AV1611VET]

It's a fact that it's a list

You want a list?

Here you go:

gas-powered cars
cement patios
glass windows
barbecue grills
fireplaces
soda pop
CO2 extinguishers

 

[Postvieww]

If ocean’s rising, why is Al Gore in Montecito? You can’t make this stuff up!

 

[USincognito]

They aren't being taken. They are just not being installed in new residential units. It says that in the linked article, so why did you say they are being taken?

Again, the linked article said that moves were being made to make appliances more efficient. Gee, who wants more efficiency, eh? What, cheaper to run? Oh, I see...

The executive order is aiming for a 50% goal of zero admission vehicles by 2030. It is not binding and is largely symbolic. But I'd guess the car manufacturers would know what the public wants. So they are aiming for 40 - 50% themselves and GM will only be selling electric cars by 2035. Again, all from your linked article.



Let me know when you can't buy a steak in the local deli. Talking of 'controlling the food supply' is a fantasy. Again, read your own linked article for details.

Our state of Victoria supplies on average just over half the state's energy needs via renewables. They regularly hit 80% and at one point last year had surplus energy and sold it to other states. It's not hard. It just needs some commitment from the people making the decisions.

It seems that your own links dismantle your own arguments...

Thank you for doing the work for us.

 

[Shemjaza]

If ocean’s rising, why is Al Gore in Montecito? You can’t make this stuff up!

You really are profoundly ignorant about what you are allegedly arguing against.

Rising sea levels are one danger from climate change in that it will severely damage water tables, ecosystems and low lying residences over the next century... not that it will flood the coastal villas that rich people live in.

In fact on a small scale there's no reason small, very wealthy communities won't be able to put up sea walls and keep their nice homes.

 

[Postvieww]

You really are profoundly ignorant about what you are allegedly arguing against.

Pointing out blatant hypocrisy is not "profoundly ignorant" ignoring it just might be!

 

[Postvieww]

They aren't being taken. They are just not being installed in new residential units. It says that in the linked article, so why did you say they are being taken?

Excuse me for not being precise. I should have said taking away the right to make a choice on what kind of stove one might want in the future. That is a little different from ripping one from ones kitchen but still a draconian step that will solve nothing for the planet. Some people just can't see the forest for the trees.

 

[Postvieww]

Again, the linked article said that moves were being made to make appliances more efficient. Gee, who wants more efficiency, eh? What, cheaper to run? Oh, I see...

I guess you just missed this opening sentence.

"Energy experts and manufacturers are warning that the Biden administration's aggressive regulatory regime will lead to more expensive household appliances that are far less effective than current models."