For those that may glance at the article and think tl;dr here's the skinny.
The author drops 2000+ words plus graphs to proffer a single simple point:
An economic study on growth-- as reported by an author on the "left" via the Guardian-- is sometimes mis-understood as predicting that climactic effects will result in a "catastrophic" 41% decrease in overall economic output by 2100, whereas what the study actually says is there will be 41% decrease in the economic growth rate as of 2100.
So what's in the other 1900+ words?
The article meanders across a wilderness of vague ideas about philosophy and an ivory-tower-intellectual ideological bias towards catastrophism by an unnecessarily lugubrious political left, which due to the author unconsciously thinking under the influence of the purest street form of Hegelian aufheben, must manifest a contrapuntal mythical pragmatic "right" to counterbalance the kooky left.
In other words, this article generates unnecessary right-leaning, political dualism and conflict via precisely what it claims to debunk: misinformation.
_wire_•4h ago
For those that may glance at the article and think tl;dr here's the skinny.
The author drops 2000+ words plus graphs to proffer a single simple point:
An economic study on growth-- as reported by an author on the "left" via the Guardian-- is sometimes mis-understood as predicting that climactic effects will result in a "catastrophic" 41% decrease in overall economic output by 2100, whereas what the study actually says is there will be 41% decrease in the economic growth rate as of 2100.
So what's in the other 1900+ words?
The article meanders across a wilderness of vague ideas about philosophy and an ivory-tower-intellectual ideological bias towards catastrophism by an unnecessarily lugubrious political left, which due to the author unconsciously thinking under the influence of the purest street form of Hegelian aufheben, must manifest a contrapuntal mythical pragmatic "right" to counterbalance the kooky left.
In other words, this article generates unnecessary right-leaning, political dualism and conflict via precisely what it claims to debunk: misinformation.