Gore's flamboyant overtures notwithstanding -- correlation does not imply causation.
Of course, nor does it disqualify it. Take, for instance the obvious correlation between global temperatures and sunspot cycles which is entirely ignored by the "solar deniers." From the Maunder Minimum's parallel to the Little Ice in the 17th century (chart) to today's Modern Maximum's place in perfect harmony with our higher temperatures, one would expect this, not hypothetical GHG theories, to have been declared the "debate ender."
Instead, through the chicanery of inverted arguments and the deliberate confusing of cause and effect, TBGSM has imposed the illusory assertion that skeptics deny rising temperatures while science has proven that man controls the thermostat.
This false Fait Accompli lends solace to an equally counterfeit disregard of remaining doubt.
Loaded Questions and Quack Quandaries
So what are we (or you) going to do to save the planet from manmade global warming?
The problem is posed ad nauseum in varying forms to politicians, talk show guests and audiences, students and climate change summit attendees. And most eagerly respond, despite having been asked something equally prejudicial to the classic law school conundrum "so, when did you stop beating your wife?"
Compelling anyone to address AGW remedies is likewise dishonest, as it implies concurrence with the unproven premise that mankind stands as guilty as the accused wife-beater.
This devious ploy of flawed reasoning is known as a Complex Question, as it deceitfully rests on an arguable assumption; any available answer would appear to endorse that assumption.
The complex question is actually a subtle form of False Dilemma, which is an alarmist staple, created by coercing someone to choose between 2 options when others are readily available. For instance, we either act now to reduce global warming or face untold cataclysm later. How often have you heard that nonsense?
And no wonder.
Before they might accept outlandish solutions, it is imperative that the public at large be terrified by AGW's primary false dilemma of action versus planetary calamity.
And once again, logical fallacies prove to be the stuff that green dreams are made of.
Fear and Loathing in the Troposphere
Without hyping the purported consequences of global warming, misrepresenting its cause would be of no particular political or economic value.
Fear refined yields a powerful motivational fuel, and without it, the public would quickly grow inured to doomsday scares and trendy liberal reflexive remedies. That's why, as an adjunct to baseless catastrophic projections, Misleading Vividness is so vital.
You've seen the pictures of snow-barren mountaintops, blazing forests, reputedly doomed to extinction Polar bears ostensibly stranded on floating ice sheets (in fact, the species has evolved to swim between sheets) and huge chunks of ice falling to the water in Greenland (a normal summertime occurrence).
Alarmists are well aware that by flashing these visually striking images as backdrop to vividly descriptive exaggerations and lies, anecdotal evidence can be used as the basis for remarkably hasty generalizations.
Indeed, audiences of such spectacle are apt to engage emotionally and, consequently, willing to suspend whatever skepticism their better judgment implies.
More despicable still, manufactured images of even greater horrific impact are routinely interspersed to further agitate the easily impressionable. Remember Gore's dreadful depictions of New York flooding and ground zero disappearing under water?
But surely there are those possessed of highly cognitive and expertly trained minds destined to ultimately save us from our own frailties of logic, aren't there?
Yes there are, but no, they won't.
We've previously revealed many of the myriad scientists who dare challenge the "settled science" of AGW, bravely risking ridicule, defunding, demotion and accusations of both lack of care about future generations (another straw man argument ) and being an "oil shill" (circumstantial ad hominem).
A Circumstantial Ad Hominem attacks a position by asserting that the person taking it is doing so simply out of self interest. While there's generally little or no proof proffered, weak-minded observers often disqualify the accused nonetheless.
At the 2007 Oscars, Gore smugly told the audience -- and an estimated 1 billion television viewers:
"that resolving the threat posed by a warming climate is ‘not a political issue, it's a moral issue.'"
In other words, if you don't agree with him, you're immoral.
It's not hard to surmise where the drones acquire their penchant for broad ad hominem attacks on heretics. Nor why it's considerably easier for those same skeptics to remain mum.
Tricks of the Tirade
actually devoid, alarmists compensate with a seemingly bottomless armory of fallacious arguments. Behold but a few more of their sleights-of-thought.
* Ad hominems are the falsely negative form of Genetic Fallacy, a logic flaw committed when an idea is evaluated on its source, rather than its merit. Conversely, similar mind trickery can be played to assert an idea which is falsely positive.
We see this irrationality in Gorebots who lecture that if their hero says the planet has a fever and it's our fault and only he knows how to save it - it does and it is and he is.
* Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (after this therefore because of this) is a similar tactic to Cum Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, but here the implication is that if one event follows another, the first event therefore caused the second.
o "Temperatures have been rising since the start of the industrial age. Therefore companies like Exxon Mobil are melting the polar ice caps"
* Affirming the consequent is an asininity which asserts the "then" of a conditional (consequent) first, and concludes with the "if" (antecedent).
o "If GHG were making the Earth warmer then we'd have less snow. Therefore, if we have less snow then GHG are making the Earth warmer."
* Appeal to Consequences of a Belief is to suggest a belief to be true simply because if people didn't accept it there'd be negative consequences.
o "We must treat Anthropogenic Global Warming as real because if people refuse to embrace it there'll be no hope for our children"
* Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance) is a fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it has yet to be proven false.
o "Global warming is certainly caused by greenhouse gases because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not"
* And the incessant "scientific consensus" claim is a combination of Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Popularity and, of course, Appeal to Bravo Sierra.
Further favorites include appeals to fear, to novelty (newness of an idea is somehow evidence of its truth), and of course, to popularity (an idea must be true simply because it is widely held). There's also The Relativist Fallacy, in which the arguer claims that while something might be true for others, he or she is exempt. Any ideas on this one (hint - think Limo Libs)?
The Debate is NOT Over When the Fat Man Sings
Given the cache of weapons TBGSM wields to shut-down debate, its obvious they've no misconceptions of prevailing should one accidentally break out. Indeed, Gore, himself, has recently refused to debate every AGW challenger tossing the gauntlet (Avery, Lord Monckton, Singer, Ball, etc).
But last week, Gore appeared on the Today Show and was asked about a WSJ op-ed penned by IPCC member and co-Nobel Prize winner John Christy which challenged Gore's dire analysis of global warming's impact and origins. The ensuing response was astounding.
After calling Christy an "outlier" who's "way outside the scientific consensus" (Ad Hominem Tu Quoque), he chided journalism's provision of equal-time to opposing viewpoints on the subject:
"Part of the challenge the news media has had in covering this story is the old habit of taking the on the one hand, on the other hand approach. There are still people who believe that the Earth is flat... you don't search out for someone who still believes the Earth is flat and give them equal time"
Okay, so he didn't actually invent the internet, but he did manage to concoct his own logical fallacy -- The Flat Earther Argument -- X disagrees with Y. Y proclaims debate over. X therefore adheres to 600 year-old geological misconceptions and is to be shunned.
Now, the same alarmists who'll follow this charlatan debate-aphobe anywhere speak of an impending "tipping point," at which the Earth's destiny will be calcified. And, while they're dead wrong about the nemesis we face, their concerns are sound.
The Big Green Scare Machine has met no burden of proof whatsoever. To the contrary, they refuse and evade every opportunity to take on their dissenters in any open, objective and analytical forum.
And yet, by way of their fraudulent tactics, they're undeniably winning the clash for public opinion. Should this trend continue, rather than prepare for the consequences of naturally shifting climate patterns, we'll risk untold wealth, progress, resources, and yes -- capitalism itself, in a popular but fool's quest to tame an immutable force of nature.
The imperative to arrest this proliferating cognitive plague through unremitting rebuttal and steadfast refusal to assimilate with its foolish collective mindset or be diverted by its puerile mind games cannot be overstated.
Nearly 20,000 scientists have signed a petition disputing AGW and denouncing Kyoto. This must be loudly shouted at those sluggishly slipping into the green stupor to reinvigorate debate and assure that reasoned voices are heard over the irrational drone of this ultimately political machine.
Footnotes:
[1] Friends of the Earth abhor this bill. Rather than directing auction proceeds to wind, solar and other untenable "renewable" energy companies, it would subsidize the coal industry's efforts to develop carbon capture and storage mechanisms. Considering that base load electric requirements will likely be met by coal-fired plants indefinitely, this green objection to helping "clean them up" certainly speaks volumes to their actual motives.
[2] In her February 9th column, Ellen Goodman combined misleading vividness, blatant ad hominem and stunning ignorance when she wrote that "global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers." Ms. Goodman might be pleased to learn that most links used to clarify logical fallacies used by AGW alarmists herein launch The Nizkor Holocaust Educational Resource Project where they are described alongside other Techniques of Holocaust Denial
Gaius of Blue Crab Boulevard has tracked down the hoaxer who created a fake scientific journal to discredit critics of global warming theory.
Thanks to alert reader Cedric, we now have a confession form David Thorpe that he was , indeed, the person who intentionally put up the fraudulent GEOCLIMATICSTUDIES.INFO website, that he did so with the intent of trying to discredit people he disagrees with and one other very, very important thing for the media to remember.
He lies to reporters. Intentionally and directly to their faces.
The resort to hoaxing does not argue that proponents of global warming theory are very confident of their own scientific grounding. And foolish leftists publicly congratulate him on his dirty trick. Going on record approving of lying does not speak that well of their intelligence, though they no doubt pride themselves on being smarter than conservatives.
Congratulations and kudos to Cedric and Gaius. Well-done, gentlemen.
GW is an oft repeated likelihood. MMGW is leftist lies and scientists in need of grant money.
Nero, you got any comment to make on my post concerning my post 963 ?..."
Um ,let's see, Exxon (big oil) Bad....?
Concerned believers of the church of MMGW good ?
Is that what you meant ?
Exxon Valdez = tragedy, needed cleaning up, mostly done, next subject ?
Bigdogma must be like an eel, oily and slippery, as oily as the propaganda he C&P's, from the "American Oil-slicker", no less...as they get desperate and start spinning. "If you can't blind them with science, baffle them with bullshit.." is the creed rubber-stamped into the empty, hollow spaces between the eyes of the "Oil Empire Finkers" writers.
What moronic crap ! What staggering spin ! Oh no ! An "Ad Hominum" attack ! Man the pumps ! The bilge is filling with anti-reality "righters", all desperate to remove themselves from the clear scientific certitude that the climate of our planet is changing FAR more rapidly than was anticipated, and that the oil and industrial barons who PAY the "righters" to spin are RESPONSABLE in a large part for this.
Nero, how about you actually read the report first.
Exxon is nowhere near "cleaned up", and the filthy shits are wiggling like Bigdog eels to get out of paying what to them is pocket change to finish the job THEY caused.
I'm sorry, but your fawning before the yaw of the Beast and your blinkered resistance to reality earns you the first "Bigdogma Assnut Award, with grovelling sycophant ribbon and oiled hole."
Atta boy !
Two things:
1) I should have been more thorough. I forgot to remind you that while leading the world through the past century, we also saved it a couple times.
2) I think you're just flat wrong about income and wealth inequality. Of course people are not born equal and they don't have an equal amount wealth. So? Not all people have the same desire to succeed, either. So? The poor people in this country are doing better than ever, the poor people who don't want to remain poor are increasingly able to improve their situation, and at the end of the day the rich are definitely paying far more than their fair share.
Once again we just have different views on personal responsibility and accountability, and whether or not the government is the answer to all problems. I don't think it is. If you want to drive a hybrid and plant trees all day, then you can. But you shouldn't make me do it if I don't want to. And if you want to be poor, jobless, and hungry then you can, but you shouldn't make me take care of you when you realize that it wasn't a good idea to start with.
And don't start with the "selfish" business like Gog. I've given more to charity and done more to help other people this year than ever before, because I've had a good year and I have more to work with. That's the general idea, right? Studies show that conservatives give more than liberals, everybody gives more when the government takes less, and private charities are more efficient than government "charities". Don't you think those ideas are linked? Leave people alone with their money and their decisions and things work out better... for everybody.
bAss is one of those citizens who hears a woman being raped on the street outside his home but chooses to clap the shutters to and turn on the TV.
"I''m not getting involved because she shouldn't be on the streets at this hour. Let nature take is course, it the way of the streets. she's an adult, let her handle her own problems. I pay taxes and that entitles me to privacy and freedom from responsibility. Where are those headphones?".
How manly of you. What a great vision you have for society... perfectly conservative, perfectly obvious and on display now, in all it's glory, thanks to two terms of GWB and the asses who elected him.
"Grammar Nazi (mockingly, grammer natzee; alternatively capitalized and uncapitalized), spelling Nazi, and language Nazi are all terms used to describe a participant in a discussion (online as well as offline) who criticizes or habitually corrects the language usage of another participant.
Such a person is often accused of flaming as a result of finding fault with minor details of other participants' messages and often only in opinions with which the accused grammar Nazi disagrees. Participants in these discussions often end up taking opposite sides in a prescription versus description debate, without realizing it.
The many exceptions and intricacies of the English language can present a problem for even the most experienced user.
This, combined with the frequency of typographical errors caused by the desire to post quickly on instant messengers, often makes it very easy to find an error in a message with which to find fault.
In other languages, if spelling is not an issue, moods, agreement, diacritics, and tenses provide an ample supply of possibilities for misunderstanding and argument.
Grammar Nazis can sometimes focus solely on the stylistic manner by which an issue comes across, which is viewed at times as an ad hominem attack, but grammar Nazis retort that grammatical and spelling errors and stylistic flaws may make an argument hard to follow, making various people (whether or not they are actually grammar Nazis) want to correct the flaws, and then, after they have sorted out what the substance of the argument in question is, dive into the debate itself."
Obfuscation.
Get back on the argument, please folks.
Bassinator, good response, well thought out.
I confess that all the information I have about the growth of the wealth gap between poor and rich in the US leads me to some grim conclusions, that frankly, I'd be happy being proven wrong about. Stuff like this:
I, for one, don't think the Government is the answer, and I sure DON'T think bigger government is a good solution, far from it. But what are the solutions ? Let the corporations rule ? (actually, they already do.... )
I think as well that you won't find a single person, throughout the planet, who has made a concious decision to be poor, jobless and hungry.
We are, at this point in time, looking into the beginning of oblivion. What we do with that information, and I've seen enough coherant and serious data to make me believe that it's valid and true, should be up to the individual. That's my big soapbox, INDIVIDUAL RESPONSABILITY.
But Bass, so much of this is out of our hands, and so much is being spun and proselytized by people who have clear links and tendrils connecting them to the groups who stand to lose the most as their greed and rapace is suddenly slapped in our faces by the evidence that WE, as a race, and THEY as polluters to sate our consumerism, are all in this together. No-one here gets out alive.
European industry has shrugged, looked at the evidence, and gone "OK, lets get to work." They can see the possibilities, and being greener won't kill anyone. It just seems like a bunch of fat, bloated dinosaurs that are clinging desperately to the edge and breaking OUR balls to cling to what isn't rightfully theirs, oblivious to the rights of others and respecting only Mammon, who are spinning the gullible around their fingers. Are you one of these gullible people, Bass ? Or do you find yourself able to see through the frankly shallow aspirations, from BOTH sides ?
... I confess that all the information I have about the growth of the wealth gap between poor and rich in the US leads me to some grim conclusions
... I, for one, don't think the Government is the answer, and I sure DON'T think bigger government is a good solution, far from it.
... But what are the solutions ?
... I think as well that you won't find a single person, throughout the planet, who has made a concious decision to be poor, jobless and hungry.
... We are, at this point in time, looking into the beginning of oblivion.
... should be up to the individual. That's my big soapbox, INDIVIDUAL RESPONSABILITY.
... so much of this is out of our hands,
... and so much is being spun
... No-one here gets out alive.
What's the problem?
You seem to have a very dismal outlook on life and the future.
Everyone makes decisions which affect their life. We all do, every day. It's the individual’s responsibility, and ONLY the individual’s responsibility to make the RIGHT DECISIONS. When you make the wrong decision - you pay the price for that decision. It really is as easy as that.
Some decide not to plan at all, or to plan only weeks or months ahead - to take the easy way. And for those it can be a rough road in the USA.
Some decide to plan long-term, and then take the (initially) more difficult way which most likely leads to prosperity and happiness. For these thinkers and planners it's tougher at first but in the long run there's greater reward. Some try the easy way, realize it doesn't work, and then try again the smarter way. Some learn this lesson early in life. Some learn it later in life. Those that learn it early in life are wise and prosperous. Those that learn it later in life are appreciative. Those that never learn it are forever unhappy and usually blame everyone else for their own problems.
Some people truly believe they have not made a conscious decision to be poor, jobless, and hungry. Yet these same people most often are the ones who make the wrong decisions and then pay the price for those decisions. That's life. Sorry if it sounds mean but it's the way it works in the USA. If you can't compete in our system, get out. Don't look for a handout, because we've all worked hard for what we have and we're not going to give it away voluntarily.
The USA has plenty of safety net programs (far too many) for those who need short-term assistance while working to get back on their feet. The USA also has plenty of long-term programs for those who cannot provide for themselves. But it's not a free ride here in the USA, and it shouldn't be and hopefully will never be a free ride. Work, work hard, and reap the rewards. Sit on your ass and you'll find it isn't fun at all - and it shouldn't be fun. It should be a real bitch to be on welfare or other entitlement programs. This crap of making babies while having no job, and then getting a bigger check every month because you have more mouths to feed - it's wrong and it encourages unacceptable behavior.
Unfortunately we in the USA give money to those who do not work. But that's a discussion for another thread of which I have no interest in participating.
Under Capitalism these people, the one's who made the wrong decisions... can make new decisions, better decisions, and can get out of their current situation and into a much better situation. It's called HARD WORK. There are programs to improve your education, gain skills, and better yourself. Under Capitalism, hard work pays off big time! Under Socialism, hard work has no benefit hence the term no longer exists.
"So Much Of This Is Out Of Our Hands"?? Not at all. Under Capitalism - ALL OF IT is directly in the individuals hands. Individual Responsibility is the key to Capitalism. There's a saying my mom and dad used to tell me whenever something wasn't going right in my life, "You made your bed now you sleep in it."
There can't be a filet mignon on every plate, or a Cadillac in every driveway. Some will work hard for minimal pay. Some will reap fantastic rewards for taking a chance and making it big. And most will end up somewhere in between the two extremes.
It's referred to as: "The Game Of Life".
At least that's how I was raised and taught to think. Try it - it works!
__________________
2001 ST4 Mod Rod
Built by BCM in 2004 and still running like a clock. 120 HP at the rear wheel. 55 mpg. Thanks Bruce (and Jay)!
I'm wondering, what do you do for a living?
And what did your father do?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanST4
What's the problem?
You seem to have a very dismal outlook on life and the future.
Everyone makes decisions which affect their life. We all do, every day. It's the individual’s responsibility, and ONLY the individual’s responsibility to make the RIGHT DECISIONS. When you make the wrong decision - you pay the price for that decision. It really is as easy as that.
Some decide not to plan at all, or to plan only weeks or months ahead - to take the easy way. And for those it can be a rough road in the USA.
"So Much Of This Is Out Of Our Hands"?? Not at all. Under Capitalism - ALL OF IT is directly in the individuals hands. Individual Responsibility is the key to Capitalism. There's a saying my mom and dad used to tell me whenever something wasn't going right in my life, "You made your bed now you sleep in it."
There can't be a filet mignon on every plate, or a Cadillac in every driveway. Some will work hard for minimal pay. Some will reap fantastic rewards for taking a chance and making it big. And most will end up somewhere in between the two extremes.
It's referred to as: "The Game Of Life".
At least that's how I was raised and taught to think. Try it - it works!
I'm actually a very optimistic and hardworking guy, but lately I keep bumping into obstacles like this that are beginning to leave a very bad taste in my mouth, and a sense of frustration at this unjustifiable, not only obscene, but totally and utterly unjustifiable excess. It leaves me with a similar sense of frustration that people who refuse to believe the evidence that Humanity has had a nefast effect on the planet, and it's time, now, to work together to clean our room up, before Dad gets home....
I wonder what you think of this hard-working guy ?
By Marc Sheppard
)
Linear Mode
