Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
49 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

This much is established:

  

If you understand that the argumentative use of consensus is a fallacy of relevance, and therefore false, why do you continue to use it to bolster your argument?  Would you agree that it's use, being that it's false, is therefore dishonest?  And if anyone purposely uses a known falsity then what might one conclude from that?

There is consensus that the Earth is not flat.

 

Deal with that argument.

  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

There is consensus that the Earth is not flat.

 

Deal with that argument.

Consensus may be true or it may be false.  But consensus, in and of it self, does not make something true or false.   If the truth is not yet established, as the debate still rages about climate changed, then consensus is irrelevant.  Therefore, to use consensus when the truth has not been definitively established to assert that consensus makes a position true then that is a deceptive and dishonest practice.

Your analogy is another form of fallacy of argument.  Per Wiki, once again, on the Argument Of Analogy Fallacy:

Argument from analogy or false analogy is a special type of inductive argument, where perceived similarities are used as a basis to infer some further similarity that has not been observed yet.

Climate change has not been definitively proven.  That the earth is not flat has been proven.

I'm beginning to think that you have extreme difficulty with processing logical thought.  Either that or you understand quite well that if consensus cannot be used to make climate change true then the climate change believers have lost a major tool in their arsenal for convincing the public of what they want the public to believe as true.  For that would mean that even the outliers on this issue would have equal standing to the majority.  Or, the truth would destroy one aspect of your narrative.  Or, all of the above.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

There is consensus that the Earth is not flat.

 

Deal with that argument.

There used to be a consensus that the Earth was flat.

 

Deal with that argument.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Consensus may be true or it may be false.  But consensus, in and of it self, does not make something true or false.   If the truth is not yet established, as the debate still rages about climate changed, then consensus is irrelevant.  Therefore, to use consensus when the truth has not been definitively established to assert that consensus makes a position true then that is a deceptive and dishonest practice.

Your analogy is another form of fallacy of argument.  Per Wiki, once again, on the Argument Of Analogy Fallacy:

Argument from analogy or false analogy is a special type of inductive argument, where perceived similarities are used as a basis to infer some further similarity that has not been observed yet.

Climate change has not been definitively proven.  That the earth is not flat has been proven.

I'm beginning to think that you have extreme difficulty with processing logical thought.  Either that or you understand quite well that if consensus cannot be used to make climate change true then the climate change believers have lost a major tool in their arsenal for convincing the public of what they want the public to believe as true.  For that would mean that even the outliers on this issue would have equal standing to the majority.  Or, the truth would destroy one aspect of your narrative.  Or, all of the above.

Human induced climate change has been proven. You are simply unable to accept that, just as Flat Earthers cannot accept the scientific consensus that the Earth isn't flat.

 

So, let me ask you the standard question: why is the Stratosphete cooling?

 

Posted

Care to weigh in on the consensus issue I'm raising, @placeholder or will you continue to ignore it?  So far you've ignored answering twice; once refusing to address it in my reply to one of your posts and once when you were mentioned by link.

It's an important issue to resolve, don't you think?  For the false assertion of consensus equating to proof is used in almost every climate change article by climate change proponents.  Including the article on which this thread is based.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

There used to be a consensus that the Earth was flat.

 

Deal with that argument.

Actually, no.

 

There were uneducated people who thought the Earth was flat, just as there are uneducated people now who don't believe in climate change.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

There used to be a consensus that the Earth was flat.

 

Deal with that argument.

Now that was absolutely brilliant, Yellowtail.  :jap:

Coincidentally, I had been thinking of digging up some historical examples where almost universal consensus within the scientific community was ultimately shown to be false.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

Care to weigh in on the consensus issue I'm raising, @placeholder or will you continue to ignore it?  So far you've ignored answering twice; once refusing to address it in my reply to one of your posts and once when you were mentioned by link.

It's an important issue to resolve, don't you think?  For the false assertion of consensus equating to proof is used in almost every climate change article by climate change proponents.  Including the article on which this thread is based.

You ignore the reality that the scientific concensus is based on proof.

 

And you ignore the proof.

 

Instead you waste our time with abstract arguments.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

Actually, no.

 

There were uneducated people who thought the Earth was flat, just as there are uneducated people now who don't believe in climate change.

Oh my God.  You can't be serious posting that as a serious reply.  :cheesy:

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

Now that was absolutely brilliant, Yellowtail.  :jap:

Coincidentally,, I had been thinking of digging up some historical examples where almost universal consensus was ultimately shown to be false.

You would have to show that the scientific proof itself was false. There was no scientific process that determined that the Earth was flat.

 

Now you Deniers are attacking the concept of scientific consensus, rather than the proof itself, because you cannot attack the proof.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Now that was absolutely brilliant, Yellowtail.  :jap:

Coincidentally,, I had been thinking of digging up some historical examples where almost universal consensus was ultimately shown to be false.

How about the Left cares about the poor? 

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

False.  Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true.  So now your shifting from consensus to repetition as a tactic to convince?  :cheesy:

CO2 is a known greenhouse gas which traps heat in the lower atmosphere. This is indisputable.

 

The amount  of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing. This is indisputable.

 

Human produced CO2 accounts for most of this increase. Again, indisputable.

 

The planet is warming. Indisputable.

 

Therefore, human produced CO2 is warming the planet. Indisputable.

 

Now you can argue against the consensus that sex causes pregnancy.

Posted
Just now, Danderman123 said:

Why is the Stratosphere cooling?

 

You cannot explain why, because you don't understand any of this. You are just here to sow doubt about climate change.

I agree the climate is changing, I just think the policies being implemented to address it are ridiculous. 

 

How many times do I have to tell you this? Please try to follow along. 

 

In spite of all the silly renewable mandates and social engineering, we continue to produce more CO2 every day. 

 

 

  • Thumbs Up 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

False.  Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true.  So now your shifting from consensus to repetition as a tactic to convince?  :cheesy:

So, why is the Stratosphere cooling?

 

Why are the Deniers unable to answer this simple question?

Posted
1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

I agree the climate is changing, I just think the policies being implemented to address it are ridiculous. 

 

How many times do I have to tell you this? Please try to follow along. 

 

In spite of all the silly renewable mandates and social engineering, we continue to produce more CO2 every day. 

 

 

You agree that human produced greenhouse gases are warming the planet?

Posted
4 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You ignore the reality that the scientific concensus is based on proof.

 

And you ignore the proof.

 

Instead you waste our time with abstract arguments.

 

16 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Consensus may be true or it may be false.

Again, are you serious, Danderman123, in consistently deny the truth of that statement?

I'm not ignoring any truth.  And here you're using another logical fallacy.  To disagree with a position does not infer that a position is ignored.  The conclusion does not follow the premise.

 

Are you saying that logic is abstract?  :cheesy:

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You would have to show that the scientific proof itself was false. There was no scientific process that determined that the Earth was flat.

 

Now you Deniers are attacking the concept of scientific consensus, rather than the proof itself, because you cannot attack the proof.

No, you're clinging to a falsity for dear life, still trying to pretend it's true.  The chutzpah you're displaying is truly comical.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

How about the Left cares about the poor? 

 

 

You've shown exceptional inspiration this morning, Yellowtail.  Another classic truth.  :laugh:

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

I'm posting information from Wiki on long established and accepted fallacies of argument.  Consensus being one of them.  To say that I'm posting false information is to say that Wiki's page on fallacies of argument is false information since I simply copied and pasted it.  So saying that I'm posting false information is patently false.

And BOOM!! you immediately post an article on scientific consensus which suggests that consensus makes something true.  I mean, what does the above say?  Well, it's more than obvious.

BTW, neither @Danderman123 nor @placeholder have offered to address this issue.  Hmmmm . . .  I wonder why?

 

You place a lot on wiki based on Consensus, in which case here's something else from Wiki for you:

 

image.png.e06931a811774ec11d863ab952edd923.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus

 

Oh and here's another wiki entry for you.

 

image.png.bbdd9a9b37ba27a98facefb1c6b562b8.png

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Take it easy there Tippy. These klimate change enthusiasts will go straight to 'Google', and then usually to the 'Wiki' page, when ever they face a difficult question.

 

We know it is all a hoax. And I've got my views on why it is being pushed so hard, but that's beyond the scope of the topic.

 

Grab yerself a cold beer, and reflect how fortunate some of us are, not to be so easily taken in.

 

.

 

Tippy's whole post is based on a wiki entry link.....lol

Posted

I note that it is more humid this year and consequently hotter with temperatures also generally lower than in recent years.

I have read in recent months that solar activity has increased and therefore it can be assumed that the heat of the sun hitting the earth has increased.

If it increases more as the sorcerer Gutierrez predicts, we could ask for political asylum in Finland where it seems that so far all Finns pray every evening for it to get warmer.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Care to weigh in on the consensus issue I'm raising, @placeholder or will you continue to ignore it?  So far you've ignored answering twice; once refusing to address it in my reply to one of your posts and once when you were mentioned by link.

It's an important issue to resolve, don't you think?  For the false assertion of consensus equating to proof is used in almost every climate change article by climate change proponents.  Including the article on which this thread is based.

Well, here's my reply to your logorrhea

It if were just a case of arguing from authority, you might have a point. If this was a discussion of history, religion or literature where opinions necessarily play a part, your claims would be valid. But this is not about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or the role of irony in Jane's Austen novels, or how much did familial ties contribute to the decline of the Roman Empire. This is science, and it's not the authority of an individual per se that's being invoked, but the weight of their research. What's more, the major dissenters to this research have repeatedly failed in their predictions and have even resorted to blatantly misleading evidence to support their case. I have spent a lot of time here, showing how misleading or misled ACC denialists are. Given the overwhelming weight of the results of research, the odds that current basic understanding of major contribution of increased emissions of CO2, methane, nitrous oxide etc. is false,  are clearly statistically insignificant.

Of course, if someone is a conspiracy theorist and an ACC denialist, then they will claim that the scientific results are being faked, or that there's a worldwide conspiracy to keep contrary findings suppressed., or some other unproveable claim. Since arguing with conspiracy theorists is futile, that's a course I don't intend to follow. 

 

  • Thanks 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...