Marianne Williamson

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 57
10/26/2024, 5:16:44 AM
X
In reply to:
🇺🇸 sedition sam 🍊
@sam58820737
·
255d
@marwilliamson The scientific process denies the religion of climate extremism.

Sustainable energy? Good. Reducing pollution? Good. Using a fake existential threat to justify a failed Marxist religion? Bad.
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
255d
One presidential candidate is a climate change denier, while the other wants to continue fracking but increase investments in green energy. That’s how bought and sold we are by Big Oil.
James Murray
@James_BG
·
257d
It really is hard to get across quite how bad this is. We’re on track for 3C of warming, which could easily result in catastrophic cascading risks to human civilisation. And emissions are still rising. https://www.businessgreen.com/ne…

The statement 'Puhleez' is a dismissive response to a conversation about climate change, which is a significant public issue. The original conversation involves a debate on climate change policies and the role of scientific and political perspectives in addressing environmental concerns.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The dismissive tone of 'Puhleez' does not contribute to a constructive dialogue and could be seen as undermining the seriousness of the issue, thus potentially causing harm by trivializing the discussion. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does not respect the dignity of the conversation by being dismissive.
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion as it dismisses the previous argument without providing a counterpoint or engaging in meaningful dialogue. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue, as it dismisses the previous comment without addressing the points made or providing a reasoned argument. [-1]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement does not uphold the principles of free speech responsibly, as it dismisses a complex issue without contributing to the discourse. [-1]