Posted on 01/31/2008 3:32:21 AM PST by mattstat
There is a distressing commonality when discussing climate science lately: many people skip past the data and arguments offered by a skeptic and ask the question, “Are you a climatologist?” The implication, sometimes flatly stated, is that, if you are not, then you have no business offering a negative opinion on the state of “the” science.
It is distressing because I repeatedly have to point out that it is a logical fallacy that because a person is not a climatologist their skeptical argument is therefore false. If you like labels, this fallacious retort is called the Appeal to Authority. Each argument must be assessed on its merits and cannot be dismissed because the person offered it does not meet a certain credentialing standard. Climate theory arguments from non-experts cannot be banned or forbidden tout court.
Being open to arguments from non-specialists in other fields has meant that honest scientists
(Excerpt) Read more at wmbriggs.com ...
Kind of like, “you deny evolution? well, are you a biologist?!?!?”
Great points all, well stated....but it all boils down to the fact that liberals retort by beating the messenger, conservatives retort by sticking to the facts. The dumbing down of the masses by Gubmint educators is expanding the liberal base.
McCain (liberal) v. Romney (conservative) was a great display of that tendency last nite. (note...liberals don’t know they are doing it, so none will have noticed this difference, especially ACooper)
Need a technical explanation: Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus by Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Ecxcellent.
Thanks for posting.
Excellent. (yikes)
You’re no English teacher.
Over the past few years, the organization has turned to the battle against global warming in a particularly hysterical manner. In 1989 the group began to circulate a petition urging recognition of global warming as potentially the great danger to mankind. Most recipients who did not sign were solicited at least twice more. The petition was eventually signed by 700 scientists including a great many members of the National Academy of Sciences and Nobel laureates. Only about three or four of the signers, however, had any involvement in climatology. Interestingly, the petition had two pages, and on the second page there was a call for renewed consideration of nuclear power. When the petition was published in the New York Times, however, the second page was omitted.
Here's the money quote.
exactly...
The Appeal to Authority Fallacy and its inverse are hallmarks of the left. Another quintessential example is their insistence that only (antiwar) Veterans are able to offer an opinion on the validity of the War on Terror.
rolling stone magazine should sell “I R a climatologist” diplomas for $20.
Yup!
I have just as much authority to publicly "deny" or be "skeptical" as a Mechanical Engineer as fellow M.E. Bill-Nye "the Science Guy" has to make stupid hysterical claims of doom.
For that matter, I probably have MORE authority to state my skepticism than that "Climate Expert" woman from the weather channel who has a PhD in some sort of "Mystical Religious Studies". But she is treated as an "expert" and I am not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
