A. I'm not downplaying climate change.
B. Perhaps you've heard of World War II? Or the Cold War? Both were threats to the survival of mankind at least as much as climate change, perhaps more so.
B. Perhaps you've heard of World War II? Or the Cold War? Both were threats to the survival of mankind at least as much as climate change, perhaps more so.
B. Can you stay on topic please? That is the second topic you bring up without anyone asking.
Funny enough, you downplayed climate change again.
What's extremely "funny" in some sense of that word is that elsewhere on HN I am discussing climate change and environmental issues in earnest and it hasn't gotten one tenth the attention this has gotten, which is proof positive of my point: people have big feels about the topic and vent a lot about it but don't want to really engage constructively with it anywhere near as much.
FYI, I'm a woman. It's my policy to generally not correct people who misgender me on HN, but in this case I will note it and suggest that perhaps your powers of observation aren't the best.
Someone mentioned existential dread, which also really has nothing to do with anything "on topic." I commented on that about finding it sort of funny. Lots of people felt some need to reply to my comment when most of my comments get very little engagement.
I wish my more serious comments got more meaty engagement. This whole thing strikes me as a ridiculous overeaction.
You initial comment wasn't serious? You are somewhat confusing to talk to. Let's end this and agree to disagree.
It's just not anything that merits some giant pile-on of pushback from HN that makes it sound like I'm some extremely famous and influential environmental activist who just pulled a William Shatner and laughed in the face of my core audience on SNL and told them to "get lives" and "worry about something more important."
To me, this is like "Woah, dude. HN is histrionic here. Wow."
> If you don't like a tangent, you don't have to engage with it.
I will engage with anybody trying to downplay climate change. Thanks. The Whataboutism part wasn't part of the discussion until the second topic was brought up.
They invented the atom bomb during WW2 and dropped it on two cities in Japan to get Japan to give up its stubborn refusal to surrender. Some Japanese soldiers hid in caves and devotedly didn't surrender for decades afterwards.
> Some Japanese soldiers hid in caves and devotedly didn't surrender for decades afterwards.
Yes, and they killed several innocent citizens in Phillipines. It was a tragic. In the meanwhile Japan's economics blossomed and average Japanese people enjoyed much better life quality than pre-WWII under a militarism government.
If you take a look at the history of China's population, you can hardly tell when WWII happened[1]. Hope this put things in perspective.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_China#/m...