21 lines to get people to think about fossil fuels in a balanced way

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

68% : In my experience, starting conversations about fossil fuels with these lines is the best way to turn non-supporters into supporters and supporters into champions.
58% : This is a commonsense principle that most people agree with, but few people follow when it comes to one particular technology: fossil fuels.
57% : Below are 21 lines that I use to get people to think about fossil fuels in a balanced way.
55% : For example, climate scientist Michael Mann's book on fossil fuels and climate doesn't once mention the essential benefit of fossil fuel use to the availability of food -- even though 8 billion people depend on diesel machinery and natural gas fertilizer to eat! 2.
55% : To decide what to do about fossil fuels we must be balanced, looking at both negatives and positives.
54% : AMERICA NEEDS ENERGY RESILIENCY, NOT BIDEN-HARRIS' ACTIVIST IDEOLOGY If I can get someone to agree that we must think about fossil fuels in a balanced way -- carefully weighing both benefits and side-effects -- then, I've found, they are far more likely to be receptive to any facts I share with them.
50% : Fossil fuels do impact climate -- but even there we must consider positives along with negatives. 8.
50% : The IPCC's 1,000+ page climate reports ignore all the ways fossil fuels increase climate safety.
49% : The prospect of banning antibiotics sounds so irrational that no one is seriously discussing it -- yet this is exactly what many "experts" advocate when it comes to fossil fuels. 6.
43% : A huge, ignored climate positive we get from fossil fuels is the ability to master climate danger. 10.
34% : Most "experts" look at the negatives of fossil fuels but ignore the huge positives.
31% : Sadly, many "experts" exaggerate the negatives of fossil fuels in addition to ignoring the positives.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.