Very cool ‘climate debate’ chart showing arguments of both sides.
-
Join 3 other subscribers
-
fresh off the webs
old
Blogroll
Hey there! Thanks for dropping by Silent Parrot! Take a look around and grab the RSS feed to stay updated. See you around!
Very cool ‘climate debate’ chart showing arguments of both sides.
Silent Parrot
I note that the “structure” of the point-counterpoint in this manner has a particular bent. Whether intentional or not, it works like this: Skeptic makes a point (left side) and it is “rebutted” or defeated (on the right side). Consider how the effect would be different if the “Global Warming” position was stated on the left side, and the point was “rebutted” by the skeptics on the right side. So the choice of which view is presented first itself affects the perception. His point that this is how confusing it is to a layperson is germane. But in making the point, his choice of which side makes the point and which the counterpoint adds to the confusion and creates the impression that the skeptic’s view is successfully rebutted. And the skeptics have no opportunity to defeat the proposed defeater.
Subtle, but significant. Most readers will draw conclusions from the analysis beyond the sole point he is entitled to make — that is, laypeople will be confused.
Also, the description of the sides as “Consensus” and “Skeptic” is a thumb on the scale. He might have considered “Man-made Warming? – Yes” and “Man-made Warming? – No”
So it only bears a resemblance to an unbiased report.
A meta-thought came to mind as I’ve reflected more on this whole Global Warming thing, and that’s the principle of utter integrity that seems to be missing in much that passes for scientific inquiry today when the results are intended to affect policy. I was going to quote from a Commencement address to Cal Tech in 1974 by physicist Richard Feynman on this very topic, but on reflection, the whole address is too good to merely quote from it. Here’s the link: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.pdf