Talk about Ad Hominum!gentlemanjSeptember 7 2006, 18:27:42 UTC
Dear me; that's right up there with "If you don't vote for Nixon, you must be a Commie!" Let's see...here, have a list of "fools": Altheide, David L; Anderson, Terry L; Arens, William; Braithwaite, Roger J; Christianson, Gale E; Chylek, P; Cosimo,J.C; Cook, Timothy E; Cooke, Roger M; Doran, P.T; Drake, Frances; Etheridge, D.M; Fagan, Brian; Glassner, Barry; Gross, Paul R...
I could go on with this list. These are all authors of scientific treatises on the subject of climate change and modern fearmongering. I suppose that you will accuse them all of being on the string of corporations, but I see no evidence of that.
If you wonder where I got all of these from, they are part--only a small part--of Michael Crichton's bibliography in his new book "State of Fear." It is fiction, but very much in the sense that 1984 was fiction. It deals with real problems, and I think it is well worth reading.
I clearly recall that enviromentalists were warning of a new ice age in the 1970s. Many doomsayers were predicting complete global catastrophe by the end of the 1980s. I'm getting sick of the nonstop scare industry academia has turned into. And if that makes me a fool, oh well--at least I'm in good company!
I don't know how foolish you are in any other arena, but waving that novel around and reading the list of names in his bibliography is a pretty poor foundation for any platform, especially if you intend to dismiss the realities of global warming so easily. You'll have to wave it a lot harder.
I'm sorry you chose indignance; I was not agreeing with an assessment of your character or abilities, but rather your argument. I'm sure you're actually gracious, thoughtful, and even-keeled under less trying conditions. Let's have tea!
Any time. It's just that the bibliography of that book appears to have quite a compilation of respectable information, and I wouldn't be quite so quick to turn up my nose at it. Remember, I'm not saying the novel itself is a scientific argument: I'm saying that the sources he refers to are worth reading. Is that a bad argument?
Frankly, this reminds me strongly of what Orwell said united both the Communist Party and the Catholic Church: their conviction that one could not be both intelligent and intellectually honest and disagree with them. So it seems that if one questions global warming, one is either a fool or an industry stooge. This is what bothers me--this refusal to have an honest debate. I suspect that this what also annoys Michael Crichton. And name-calling doesn't make me less suspicious about the hysterical aspect of it.
If one questioned McCarthy, he called you a Communist. If you questioned a Christian fanatic about Satanic Child Murder, he'll call you a Satanist. If I question Mo about global warming, I'm called a short-sighted fool repeatedly. See what I mean about Ad Hominum attacks?
But you have offered no honest debate, not a single argument, just a reference to something that doesn't actually address the point of my post. You call it hysteria without actually saying why, but I'm at fault for calling you a fool. Now that's seems really foolish to me!
I think that the effort would be better spent figuring out what to do if global warming is real and dangerous. I am not inclined to debate it at this late stage. And it raises my hackles when there is the implication made that because it's possible to compile a list of names who hold contradicting opinions, that the future could go either way, and it's a matter of choosing the ideas you like best and refusing to examine the emperor's clothes too closely.
It doesn't matter if global warming is natural and cyclic and perfectly in accordance with what is holy and good, or if us wicked mean old human beans made it happen. There's new science being done every day verifying and exploring the problem. It turns out that there may be an even bigger, shorter term danger, if the methane and CO2 that is trapped in the permafrost is released too quickly, it could cause extinction events.
I have a child who may one day ask, "Why didn't you do anything to stop this?" and I am too proud to tell her, because I didn't believe the warnings and sought always for a second opinion for surcease from my fear.
I will be delighted to apologize to everyone I've disagreed with when it turns out that everything is okay and global warming either isn't really happening or it's not really a big deal after all. I won't be too proud to admit I was wrong, and certainly it won't be the first time I've been overly melodramatic in my estimates of looming doom.
Okay, I can respect that. I'm glad that your ego is not so wrapped up in this that you can't admit the possibility that you might be wrong. I, of course, hope that you're wrong, but I feel you're a Mensch either way.
Frankly, I suspect that global warming(if it actually does exist)is preventing a recurrence of the Ice Age, which seems to be rather overdue.
I have been hearing predictions of catastrophe all my life. I have heard everything from PETA's equating the chicken industry with the Holocaust to ELF torching SUVs and condo complexes because it thinks that it's somehow important to saving the planet.
The problem may well be overpopulation, in which case the answer might be mass murder---I understand Cyklon B works well---but is that the road we want to go down?
Myself, I have had no children, so I have not added to the overpopulation problem. How about you? See? I can be smug and self-righteous, if I want to be...but that's not the mature way to debate things.
Re: Talk about Ad Hominum!gentlemanjSeptember 7 2006, 19:20:20 UTC
I think that you are intellectually dishonest if you will refuse to examine scientific evidence that does not pander to your prejudices. I have just pointed out a pile of writings that contradict the bases of "global warming," and you tell me that I'm a fool.
You don't reply with any kind of logic, just name-calling. You mistake the fervor of your emotional response for reasoned discourse. You owe me an apology. And for pete's sake, read these reports!
Altheide, David L; Anderson, Terry L; Arens, William; Braithwaite, Roger J; Christianson, Gale E; Chylek, P; Cosimo,J.C; Cook, Timothy E; Cooke, Roger M; Doran, P.T; Drake, Frances; Etheridge, D.M; Fagan, Brian; Glassner, Barry; Gross, Paul R...
I could go on with this list. These are all authors of scientific treatises on the subject of climate change and modern fearmongering. I suppose that you will accuse them all of being on the string of corporations, but I see no evidence of that.
If you wonder where I got all of these from, they are part--only a small part--of Michael Crichton's bibliography in his new book "State of Fear." It is fiction, but very much in the sense that 1984 was fiction. It deals with real problems, and I think it is well worth reading.
I clearly recall that enviromentalists were warning of a new ice age in the 1970s. Many doomsayers were predicting complete global catastrophe by the end of the 1980s. I'm getting sick of the nonstop scare industry academia has turned into. And if that makes me a fool, oh well--at least I'm in good company!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I don't know how foolish you are in any other arena, but waving that novel around and reading the list of names in his bibliography is a pretty poor foundation for any platform, especially if you intend to dismiss the realities of global warming so easily. You'll have to wave it a lot harder.
I'm sorry you chose indignance; I was not agreeing with an assessment of your character or abilities, but rather your argument. I'm sure you're actually gracious, thoughtful, and even-keeled under less trying conditions. Let's have tea!
Reply
Reply
If one questioned McCarthy, he called you a Communist. If you questioned a Christian fanatic about Satanic Child Murder, he'll call you a Satanist. If I question Mo about global warming, I'm called a short-sighted fool repeatedly. See what I mean about Ad Hominum attacks?
Reply
Reply
Reply
It doesn't matter if global warming is natural and cyclic and perfectly in accordance with what is holy and good, or if us wicked mean old human beans made it happen. There's new science being done every day verifying and exploring the problem. It turns out that there may be an even bigger, shorter term danger, if the methane and CO2 that is trapped in the permafrost is released too quickly, it could cause extinction events.
I have a child who may one day ask, "Why didn't you do anything to stop this?" and I am too proud to tell her, because I didn't believe the warnings and sought always for a second opinion for surcease from my fear.
I will be delighted to apologize to everyone I've disagreed with when it turns out that everything is okay and global warming either isn't really happening or it's not really a big deal after all. I won't be too proud to admit I was wrong, and certainly it won't be the first time I've been overly melodramatic in my estimates of looming doom.
Reply
!
Reply
Frankly, I suspect that global warming(if it actually does exist)is preventing a recurrence of the Ice Age, which seems to be rather overdue.
I have been hearing predictions of catastrophe all my life. I have heard everything from PETA's equating the chicken industry with the Holocaust to ELF torching SUVs and condo complexes because it thinks that it's somehow important to saving the planet.
The problem may well be overpopulation, in which case the answer might be mass murder---I understand Cyklon B works well---but is that the road we want to go down?
Myself, I have had no children, so I have not added to the overpopulation problem. How about you? See? I can be smug and self-righteous, if I want to be...but that's not the mature way to debate things.
Reply
I'm not aware of an overpopulation problem. Perhaps you can link me to some current science on that subject?
Reply
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060907102808.htm
Reply
Reply
You don't reply with any kind of logic, just name-calling. You mistake the fervor of your emotional response for reasoned discourse. You owe me an apology. And for pete's sake, read these reports!
Reply
Leave a comment