On Extremism: What it is and how to stand up to it.

Quote:

1) Do you believe that Trump voters (47% of the electorate) represent a diverse group of perspectives and that they have valid points of view on many issues?

You are avoiding the point, Hightor.

Part of extremism is the inability to accept that people outside of their ideology have diverse experiences and valid points. The question I posed challenges you to accept a significant group of Americans.

If you can provide a serious answer to how Trump voters make a valid point, then you will seriously damage my argument.

Fortunately you are unable to do this. This is common in for both of the political extremes. So far, no one has addressed any of the three points I raise in my original post.

I agree there are Americans who don't fit into the left-right categories. I do believe that Americans are more divided into left and right than ever in recent history. The constant name-calling and outrage on both sides is evidence of this.

I have repeatedly challenged liberals on able2know to point out issues on which they feel conservatives make a valid point. So far, no one has even made the attempt. Anyone who can find valid points on both sides of the political chasm in the US has my respect.

And even in areas where I am set in concrete in my position (to the left) I concede valid points from the people across the aisle. Abortion, for instance.

Quote:

And even in areas where I am set in concrete in my position (to the left) I concede valid points from the people across the aisle. Abortion, for instance.

I know – I can understand why some people oppose abortion rights. It might be a valid personal point. But as abortion is an elective medical procedure supported by a majority of citizens I don't consider it a valid political point.

The liberal extreme makes the claim that the pro-life side wants to "deny women health care".

You can be pro-choice without making this extreme argument, however the extreme arguments is what you mostly hear from both the political left and the political right.

I know a fair number of people who are pro-life. I don't know any of them whose goal is to deny women health care.

The claim that sea levels would rise 400 feet is a good example of this.

Projecting future sea level is challenging, due to the complexity of many aspects of the climate system and to time lags in sea level reactions to Earth temperature changes. As climate research into past and present sea levels leads to improved computer models, projections have consistently increased. In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projected a high end estimate of 60 cm (2 ft) through 2099,[6] but their 2014 report raised the high-end estimate to about 90 cm (3 ft).[7] A number of later studies have concluded that a global sea level rise of 200 to 270 cm (6.6 to 8.9 ft) this century is "physically plausible".[8][2][9] A conservative estimate of the long-term projections is that each Celsius degree of temperature rise triggers a sea level rise of approximately 2.3 meters (4.2 ft/degree Fahrenheit) over a period of two millennia (2,000 years): an example of climate inertia.[1] In February 2021, a paper published in Ocean Science suggested that past projections for global sea level rise by 2100 reported by the IPCC were likely conservative, and that sea levels will rise more than previously expected.[10]

Abortion provides a great example. You can have a pro-life position or a pro-choice position without taking an extreme position. This is an issue where the facts support more than one position and where you stand depends on personal judgement.

The liberal extreme makes the claim that the pro-life side wants to "deny women health care". This is a meaningless attack at best since the purpose is to denigrate the other side rather than to discuss the issue. I know a fair number of people who are pro-life. I don't know any of them whose goal is to deny women health care.

You can be pro-choice without making this extreme argument, however the extreme arguments is what you mostly hear from both the political left and the political right.

It is not the positions you take that makes you an extremist. It is the inability to question your own point of view or to accept that reasonable people with valid points are on the other side of the issue.

Abstract
The spatial distribution of ocean-induced melting beneath buttressing ice shelves is often cited as an important factor controlling Antarctica’s sea-level contribution. Using numerical simulations, we investigate the relative sensitivity of grounded-ice loss to the spatial distribution and overall volume of ice-shelf melt over two centuries. Contrary to earlier work, we find only minor sensitivity to melt distribution (<6%), with a linear dependence of ice loss on the total melt. Thus, less complex models that need not reproduce the detailed melt distribution may simplify the projection of future sea level. The linear sensitivity suggests a contribution of up to 5.1 cm from Pine Island Glacier over the next two centuries given anticipated levels of ocean warming, provided its ice shelf does not collapse because of other causes.

Quote:

I know a fair number of people who are pro-life. I don't know any of them whose goal is to deny women health care.

If their goal is to make it impossible to obtain an abortion that would, by definition, deny women health care.

I know a fair number of people who are pro-life. I don't know any of them whose goal is to deny women health care.

If (completely hypothetically speaking) someone were to claim that sea levels are going to risk 400 ft or that Washington DC would be uninhabitable in 50 years, then those would be equally extreme.

Your question is frivolous, it is a word game.

I know a fair number of people who are pro-life. I don't know any of them whose goal is to deny women health care.