> Is "talking points" just a roundabout way to summarily dismiss the opposition's arguments and imply they're dumb/misguided?

For me, yes it is. It wouldn't if policy discussions were purely technical and well informed. In the arena of public discourse they aren't. The majority of the population (including HN) is tribal, ideologically biased, emotionally driven and badly informed. Public discourse, particularly in America, is contaminated by propaganda of established economic powers (i.e.: Big Oil, Big Pharma, Tech companies). They can easily advance their talking points because they have much more economic resources for propaganda and lobbying.

I agree that, eventually, most people will discover that oil & coal are doomed and destroying the world. Reality has a way to force itself into ideologies.

But that will take a long time. I need truth and certainty now.

▲

balops 4 hours ago | parent [-]

At the moment most who are chasing the green agenda are learning that it’s not reliable. Germany for I instance can’t even figure out where their power comes from and their grid is an absolute mess. They are busy destroying their nuclear power plants and coal plants while prices are skyrocketing and reliability is disappearing and systems are failing. The propaganda of the green is winning at the cost of people’s lives.

	▲	wasabi991011 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Why is that a failure of the green agenda as opposed to a failure of Germany? Edit: I don't have the facts about reliability of green energy (though you didn't provide any evidence against it either), but it's clear the "not knowing where your energy comes from", "having messy grid" and "not investing in nuclear" are unrelated to renewable energy.
	▲	bryanlarsen 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Germany's grid is an absolute mess because their nat gas pipelines have been cut off. Renewables are preventing a worse disaster, saving their limited LNG storage capacity to cover for dankelflautes.