The argument for significant man made global warming has always rested on stridency and alarmist what if thinking than sound reasoning. The most common response to critics of global warming are ad hominems and genetics (fallacy). The genetic fallacy and ad hominems spares one from actually answering any arguments.
I haven’t seen Gore’s documentary yet. I have seen Gore on shows contemptuously dismissing any critic of global warning. The Claremont blog recently mentioned Gore’s video.
According to Gore, there is no credible criticism of manmade global-warming, in scientific journals (none) or out (bogus). Opposition is based either on ignorance, apathy or selfish motives, such as those of the oil and gas companies who employ writers and speakers to divert attention from the "inconvenient truth."
In truth, Gore and his movie reflect the very characteristics which he deplores in his critics: appeal to authority, closed-mindedness and impatience with criticism.
I only mention it now as a point about rhetoric. Science does attempt to respond to critics and seeks out critics. That’s the point of science. Say what you may about Gore, but don’t call his rants scientific.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment