29-07-2011, 08:25 PM
(This post was last modified: 30-07-2011, 02:41 AM by Greg Burnham.)
Gary,
What amounts to an ad hominem attack against Spencer is not a valid argument with which to debunk his argument for skepticism. It is fallacious.
Why did the HIGHEST annual temperature recorded occur in the year 1929 as opposed to it being much, much later--say 2005--if the cause of increased warming is mainly driven by man made activities that increase C02 concentration in the atmosphere, such as, automobile emissions?
In my view, that question needs to be adequately answered prior to making claims that we are causing "climate change" through the use of technology that was not in wide use until much, much later.
That you (and any of the MMGW alarmist scientists) have failed to answer that question does not mean you're wrong. It means that you are committing a fallacy called, Special Pleading, in which you ignore evidence that runs contrary to your conclusion without demonstrating any reasonable explanation for the relative difference between the value of the accepted evidence and the value of the rejected evidence.
On its face, that evidence (1929 temperature data) is counter-intuitive to your conclusion. Ignoring it does not lessen its significance.
What amounts to an ad hominem attack against Spencer is not a valid argument with which to debunk his argument for skepticism. It is fallacious.
Why did the HIGHEST annual temperature recorded occur in the year 1929 as opposed to it being much, much later--say 2005--if the cause of increased warming is mainly driven by man made activities that increase C02 concentration in the atmosphere, such as, automobile emissions?
In my view, that question needs to be adequately answered prior to making claims that we are causing "climate change" through the use of technology that was not in wide use until much, much later.
That you (and any of the MMGW alarmist scientists) have failed to answer that question does not mean you're wrong. It means that you are committing a fallacy called, Special Pleading, in which you ignore evidence that runs contrary to your conclusion without demonstrating any reasonable explanation for the relative difference between the value of the accepted evidence and the value of the rejected evidence.
On its face, that evidence (1929 temperature data) is counter-intuitive to your conclusion. Ignoring it does not lessen its significance.
GO_SECURE
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
James Hepburn -- Farewell America (1968)
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
James Hepburn -- Farewell America (1968)