I agree.
But since the article make some valid point (the gaz extraction was already forbidden) and cement is C02 intensive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_concrete) , I’d rather hear some argument against it, than an ad-hominem about the author.
do that make it false?
It makes it untrustworthy.
It also means it implicitly denies its biases.
It might still be true, but that’s a coincidence.
I agree. But since the article make some valid point (the gaz extraction was already forbidden) and cement is C02 intensive (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_concrete) , I’d rather hear some argument against it, than an ad-hominem about the author.
Yes