Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Global Warming and other "controversies": how to make up your mind as a layman?
Annafan
Member (Idle past 4579 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 1 of 5 (494839)
01-19-2009 6:22 AM


new title? "Global Warming and other "controversies": how to make up your mind as a layman?"
Ok, so my initial intention for this thread was to "pose" as a Man Made Global Warming (MMGW) denier and learn from some of the reactions before "coming out". Since that isn't in the spirit of this forum, we'll do it the proper way, even though it means I can now no longer escape looking somewhat like a fool, and things are a lot longer.
Since more than a week I have been involved in a debate on the comments section of a technology site. The topic was Man Made Global Warming, and I got involved because of the poor argumentation used by so many commenters (the comments are, IMO, totally infested with Al Gore-hating outright deniers). It is really really really hard to stand some of the stupidity (oversimplification and ad hominems) on display there.
Now I bumped into this one guy who is this strange mixture between outright denier, displaying some of the same troll-like language, and (presumably) practicing scientist. Since I myself am neither a scientist or even closely following up the status of MMGW(I was actually concentrating on HOW most of the deniers come to their opinions), I thought it might be interesting to also look into some of the aspects here. One of the side reasons for this is, that "layman" criticism of MMGW has a lot of the signatures of creationist layman criticism of evolution. Mainly the constant regurgitation of counter-arguments that have been addressed long ago, and can be found all over the Net via a simple Google search.
The subject that interconnects everything is: what is the most sensible approach for laymen, or even scientists in unrelated fields, to make up their mind about certain supposedly controversial (scientific) subjects?.
Here are some of the arguments (some related to each other) used in our conversation for and against accepting MMGW. (In the first reply I'll post the responses that I myself used.)
- "I have a BS in biochemistry (what are YOUR credentials? Please take a couple of science classes (not engineering, but science).). I look at everything critically and scientifically, and I have yet to see the first study which convincingly links warming to CO2 levels and/or human activity. The CO2 levels lag by 200 years instead of lead. Furthermore not one model used by the MMGW fanboys matches reality.
- "there is not a consensus in the scientific community for or against MMGW. Show me the consensus. There are plenty of climatologists, geologist, ecologists, atmospheric chemists, etc. who have openly come out against the political consensus.
- "Consensus is merely the fallacy of argumentum ad populum, anyway. Consensus is political. Scientific Method is, well, scientific. Your examples of our trust in food additive safety, cell phone radiation safety and vaccine safety are not examples of relying on authority and consensus."
- "Those who preach the MMGW doctrine are very effective. Their arguments are convincing. They have people in high places (and well respected) on their side. They even have scientific minds echoing their words. But when it comes right down to it, the actual scientific evidence is just not there. They do not publish their truths for all to read, but keep them close so that only a few may interpret their meanings.
All this was juiced up with strawmen emo-arguments like "Give me $100 Billion dollars right now or the Earth will turn into a giant fireball in 50 years. I need it quick so send it right away.", "If you would like Mainstream Media to make your policy for you, go right ahead.", "Just because AL Gore wrote a book about it, does not make it a consensus." and finally a nice one where ONE, heavily critized, experiment to study the effects of dumping iron in the ocean in an attempt to increase plankton CO2-absorption was equalled with the default position of "the MMGW crowd".
But maybe the best line was "And, I'm surprised that an engineer doesn't know enough math to read the language of cosmologists." in response to my argument that we routinely trust science in other issues where we lack a lot of knowledge. I'm curious what Cavediver thinks about the chances that a biochemist and amateur astronomer can check the validity of the latest cosmological theories in his spare time!
Bonus: an often recommended "skeptical" treatment of the MMGW scam: http://joannenova.com.au/...lwarming/skepticshandbook1-5.pdf
Edited by Annafan, : rework attempt 1 as requested by admin

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 01-19-2009 7:04 AM Annafan has replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 5 (494842)
01-19-2009 7:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Annafan
01-19-2009 6:22 AM


I'd prefer not to promote a proposal that characterizes the other side using extreme terms like "scam" and "nut job", and I also suggest requesting persuasive evidence rather than proof. Please edit your Message 1 to more dispassionately set forth your position. Post a note to this thread when you're done and I'll take another look.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Annafan, posted 01-19-2009 6:22 AM Annafan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Annafan, posted 01-19-2009 7:56 AM Admin has not replied
 Message 4 by Annafan, posted 01-20-2009 8:50 AM Admin has not replied

Annafan
Member (Idle past 4579 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 3 of 5 (494843)
01-19-2009 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
01-19-2009 7:04 AM


mail
Hi Percy,
could you check your mail (admin@) ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 01-19-2009 7:04 AM Admin has not replied

Annafan
Member (Idle past 4579 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 4 of 5 (494958)
01-20-2009 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
01-19-2009 7:04 AM


Bump... edited

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 01-19-2009 7:04 AM Admin has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 5 of 5 (495143)
01-21-2009 8:37 AM


Thread copied to the Global Warming and other "controversies": how to make up your mind as a layman? thread in the Is It Science? forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024