Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 186.

dwma

sr. member

Activity: 405

Merit: 250

Quote from: Spendulus on May 18, 2014, 06:07:17 AM

Quote from: dwma on May 18, 2014, 03:44:04 AM

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on May 18, 2014, 02:49:29 AM

Littleshop. You have logic problems with your posts here. Here are a couple...

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 12:06:44 PM

If I was in a message board trying to have a discussion and a small group was yelling about how the earth was flat or 2+2=5 I would want to shut them up too. Putting up debunked junk journal links proving 2+2=5 that link to further lies does not help.

False equivalence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence You seem to imply that people who doubt AGW theories, or see a political angle are like those who believe 2+2=5. This is also an oversimplification and a bit of ad hominem.

Quote

Just like cigarettes don't cause cancer right because you can't put 2 + 2 together. The evidence is overwhelming. The only thing not certain is the extent and what to do about it.

False equivalence again, with ad hominim again, but this time with the added bonus of a strawman. A hat trick!

You are doing badly. Try again,

Just because you claim false equivalence does not make it so. For instance, I could accuse you of that logic fallacy in your post. You are falsely equating his assertion with false equivalence, thereby using it yourself.

Really it comes down to biases for me and what is the underlying cognitive defect of you people to be so nonsensical. We got 45 pages and Wilky telling us some video is great... the video by a guy who has issues with vaccines. Now I'm sure some of you will be like 'hes a free thinker', but a lot of us will be like..

Actually, yes it is a false equivalence. You will find that rules of logic in debate are universally agreed upon. That is why there can exist things like college debating teams, which have winners, and losers. Ad hominem, which you mostly use, puts you squarely in the "debate loser category". Regarding the call of a false equivalence, you can't just claim it is not so. The burden of proof is on you - you need to go read the definition think up why it isn't a FE and state your reasons for others to review. When the comparison is the (commonly used) 2+2=5 equivalence argument you will not be able to do this.

Logical fallacies actually work pretty well in politics, and even in common speech, but on text driven Internet forums they ring false. And that's where we are. AGW by the way is a common place for discussion of logical arguments because so many of them by the true believers are not at all logical (and yes, a smaller but recognizable group are not logical by the skeptics of the global warming theory-that-is-not-a-theory).

tl;dr

Are you the logic professor?

So is every analogy a "false equivalence" ? lol.

Maybe I should ask again what the basic fallacy with the basic science of man made global warming is, but I'm sure I'll once again hear nothing but crickets.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 1386

Quote from: dwma on May 18, 2014, 03:44:04 AM

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on May 18, 2014, 02:49:29 AM

Littleshop. You have logic problems with your posts here. Here are a couple...

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 12:06:44 PM

If I was in a message board trying to have a discussion and a small group was yelling about how the earth was flat or 2+2=5 I would want to shut them up too. Putting up debunked junk journal links proving 2+2=5 that link to further lies does not help.

False equivalence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence You seem to imply that people who doubt AGW theories, or see a political angle are like those who believe 2+2=5. This is also an oversimplification and a bit of ad hominem.

Quote

Just like cigarettes don't cause cancer right because you can't put 2 + 2 together. The evidence is overwhelming. The only thing not certain is the extent and what to do about it.

False equivalence again, with ad hominim again, but this time with the added bonus of a strawman. A hat trick!

You are doing badly. Try again,

Just because you claim false equivalence does not make it so. For instance, I could accuse you of that logic fallacy in your post. You are falsely equating his assertion with false equivalence, thereby using it yourself.

Really it comes down to biases for me and what is the underlying cognitive defect of you people to be so nonsensical. We got 45 pages and Wilky telling us some video is great... the video by a guy who has issues with vaccines. Now I'm sure some of you will be like 'hes a free thinker', but a lot of us will be like..

Actually, yes it is a false equivalence. You will find that rules of logic in debate are universally agreed upon. That is why there can exist things like college debating teams, which have winners, and losers. Ad hominem, which you mostly use, puts you squarely in the "debate loser category". Regarding the call of a false equivalence, you can't just claim it is not so. The burden of proof is on you - you need to go read the definition think up why it isn't a FE and state your reasons for others to review. When the comparison is the (commonly used) 2+2=5 equivalence argument you will not be able to do this.

Logical fallacies actually work pretty well in politics, and even in common speech, but on text driven Internet forums they ring false. And that's where we are. AGW by the way is a common place for discussion of logical arguments because so many of them by the true believers are not at all logical (and yes, a smaller but recognizable group are not logical by the skeptics of the global warming theory-that-is-not-a-theory).

dwma

sr. member

Activity: 405

Merit: 250

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on May 18, 2014, 02:49:29 AM

Littleshop. You have logic problems with your posts here. Here are a couple...

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 12:06:44 PM

If I was in a message board trying to have a discussion and a small group was yelling about how the earth was flat or 2+2=5 I would want to shut them up too. Putting up debunked junk journal links proving 2+2=5 that link to further lies does not help.

False equivalence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence You seem to imply that people who doubt AGW theories, or see a political angle are like those who believe 2+2=5. This is also an oversimplification and a bit of ad hominem.

Quote

Just like cigarettes don't cause cancer right because you can't put 2 + 2 together. The evidence is overwhelming. The only thing not certain is the extent and what to do about it.

False equivalence again, with ad hominim again, but this time with the added bonus of a strawman. A hat trick!

You are doing badly. Try again,

Just because you claim false equivalence does not make it so. For instance, I could accuse you of that logic fallacy in your post. You are falsely equating his assertion with false equivalence, thereby using it yourself.

Really it comes down to biases for me and what is the underlying cognitive defect of you people to be so nonsensical. We got 45 pages and Wilky telling us some video is great... the video by a guy who has issues with vaccines. Now I'm sure some of you will be like 'hes a free thinker', but a lot of us will be like..

cAPSLOCK

legendary

Activity: 3766

Merit: 5146

Whimsical Pants

Littleshop. You have logic problems with your posts here. Here are a couple...

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 12:06:44 PM

If I was in a message board trying to have a discussion and a small group was yelling about how the earth was flat or 2+2=5 I would want to shut them up too. Putting up debunked junk journal links proving 2+2=5 that link to further lies does not help.

False equivalence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence You seem to imply that people who doubt AGW theories, or see a political angle are like those who believe 2+2=5. This is also an oversimplification and a bit of ad hominem.

Quote

Just like cigarettes don't cause cancer right because you can't put 2 + 2 together. The evidence is overwhelming. The only thing not certain is the extent and what to do about it.

False equivalence again, with ad hominim again, but this time with the added bonus of a strawman. A hat trick!

You are doing badly. Try again,

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 1386

Quote from: Wilikon on May 18, 2014, 01:33:23 AM

Quote from: dwma on May 18, 2014, 01:28:10 AM

Quote from: Wilikon on May 17, 2014, 09:28:37 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on May 17, 2014, 08:28:31 PM

well apparently there is a climategate 2 now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2J8zEJHIg8

This simple video is worth all the 45 pages on this thread...

Thank you for the link.

Yea, listen to some more of his videos. He also goes into the evil of vaccines. Good stuff.

I was responding to that particular video. But he may be wrong while covering other videos. Sure...

Of course, there are evils to vaccines, but also good. Weighing the two has always had difficulties, and many people have erred.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: dwma on May 18, 2014, 01:28:10 AM

Quote from: Wilikon on May 17, 2014, 09:28:37 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on May 17, 2014, 08:28:31 PM

well apparently there is a climategate 2 now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2J8zEJHIg8

This simple video is worth all the 45 pages on this thread...

Thank you for the link.

Yea, listen to some more of his videos. He also goes into the evil of vaccines. Good stuff.

I was responding to that particular video. But he may be wrong while covering other videos. Sure...

dwma

sr. member

Activity: 405

Merit: 250

Quote from: Wilikon on May 17, 2014, 09:28:37 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on May 17, 2014, 08:28:31 PM

well apparently there is a climategate 2 now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2J8zEJHIg8

This simple video is worth all the 45 pages on this thread...

Thank you for the link.

Yea, listen to some more of his videos. He also goes into the evil of vaccines. Good stuff.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 1386

Quote from: Anon136 on May 17, 2014, 08:28:31 PM

well apparently there is a climategate 2 now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2J8zEJHIg8

Nice summary of the whole subject and it's many logical inconsistencies.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 1386

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 09:35:33 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 17, 2014, 05:19:42 PM

Quote from: KonstantinosM on May 17, 2014, 01:16:05 PM

......
Climate change is fucking up a whole lot of people's lives already. It has killed a lot of people. This is not an unsubstantiated claim. During a catastrophic event the extra water may be all that knocked over and killed a lot of people's families. Same thing goes about heatwaves, drying out of certain areas and wild-fires. We only have one planet so we can't afford to be careless with it.

The false attribution of human death or misery to climate change BY HUMANS is the issue.

Just like cigarettes don't cause cancer right because you can't put 2 + 2 together. The evidence is overwhelming. The only thing not certain is the extent and what to do about it.

No, the evidence is underwhelming when specific weather events are said to be caused by excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere put there by man.

Floods, droughts, tornados, hurricanes, extreme rain and their extreme versions are part of the climate we have always lived with.

that is false attribution, to claim that man is fully or partly at cause for them....and frankly it seems like act of desperation.

Hundreds of millions of lives would be lost if the global warming alarmists' schemes WERE PUT INTO PLACE.

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

Quote from: Spendulus on May 17, 2014, 05:19:42 PM

Quote from: KonstantinosM on May 17, 2014, 01:16:05 PM

......
Climate change is fucking up a whole lot of people's lives already. It has killed a lot of people. This is not an unsubstantiated claim. During a catastrophic event the extra water may be all that knocked over and killed a lot of people's families. Same thing goes about heatwaves, drying out of certain areas and wild-fires. We only have one planet so we can't afford to be careless with it.

The false attribution of human death or misery to climate change BY HUMANS is the issue.

Just like cigarettes don't cause cancer right because you can't put 2 + 2 together. The evidence is overwhelming. The only thing not certain is the extent and what to do about it.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: Anon136 on May 17, 2014, 08:28:31 PM

well apparently there is a climategate 2 now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2J8zEJHIg8

This simple video is worth all the 45 pages on this thread...

Thank you for the link.

Anon136

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1217

well apparently there is a climategate 2 now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2J8zEJHIg8

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 1386

Quote from: KonstantinosM on May 17, 2014, 05:43:43 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on May 17, 2014, 05:19:42 PM

The false attribution of human death or misery to climate change BY HUMANS is the issue.

Wrong. This is definitely not a question of happenstance but of extent.

Small but consistent changes in climate can be the difference between a healthy river that supports farmers and an empty river which is useless and forces people to move.

This happened to Syria.

Denying that climate change is happening and is affecting humans and is caused by humans is not supported by the facts.

A lot of people don't like the facts but if you were to produce evidence that does not come from a biased source that what you say is correct then I'll listen. You claim, you do not argue.

Nobody will claim that man has not affected climate regionally. In some cases for the better, in some far fewer cases for the worse. River flow, though, is not climate. Smog over China is a good example of regional man made climate change.

We have seen the political discussion slide from AGW to "climate change" and now to "climate disruption". Generally, this argument is that man has somehow affected "world wide climate" in ways that cause him to experience more harmful effects from weather. This is not the same argument as regional climate change.

KonstantinosM

hero member

Activity: 1492

Merit: 763

Life is a taxable event

Quote from: Spendulus on May 17, 2014, 05:19:42 PM

The false attribution of human death or misery to climate change BY HUMANS is the issue.

Wrong. This is definitely not a question of happenstance but of extent.

Small but consistent changes in climate can be the difference between a healthy river that supports farmers and an empty river which is useless and forces people to move.

This happened to Syria.

Denying that climate change is happening and is affecting humans and is caused by humans is not supported by the facts.

A lot of people don't like the facts but if you were to produce evidence that does not come from a biased source that what you say is correct then I'll listen. You claim, you do not argue.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 1386

Quote from: KonstantinosM on May 17, 2014, 01:16:05 PM

......
Climate change is fucking up a whole lot of people's lives already. It has killed a lot of people. This is not an unsubstantiated claim. During a catastrophic event the extra water may be all that knocked over and killed a lot of people's families. Same thing goes about heatwaves, drying out of certain areas and wild-fires. We only have one planet so we can't afford to be careless with it.

The false attribution of human death or misery to climate change BY HUMANS is the issue.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: tvbcof on May 17, 2014, 01:18:22 PM

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 12:06:44 PM

...
In a public place you cannot shut them up, you must leave, argue or put up with it. In a private setting that you control (like Reddit) you can ban them.

My sister and brother-in-law have a kid and they encourage him to feel the freedom to express himself. It is the opposite of a 'children should be seen and no heard' mentality from an earlier time.

The trouble is that he is a kid and has relatively little ability to engage in thoughtful conversation. He is motivated by the need for attention and frequently attempts to break up important conversations which are over his head by injecting non-sense or simply being a nuisance by making funny noises at the dinner table and such.

There are times when the kids parents simply tell him to be quite or leave the table. This especially when the adults are having an interesting and important conversation.

This situation is very analogous to the the global climate change discussion. For scientists and other intelligent people, the issues are complex enough and nuanced enough as it is, and the interjection of nonsense from a self-interested group (or normally from their minions) is legitimately unwelcome even among those who have a disposition toward giving everyone a voice.

...Or maybe what you are describing with your sister and her husband is a lack of good parenting?

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: tvbcof on May 17, 2014, 01:18:22 PM

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 12:06:44 PM

...
In a public place you cannot shut them up, you must leave, argue or put up with it. In a private setting that you control (like Reddit) you can ban them.

My sister and brother-in-law have a kid and they encourage him to feel the freedom to express himself. It is the opposite of a 'children should be seen and no heard' mentality from an earlier time.

The trouble is that he is a kid and has relatively little ability to engage in thoughtful conversation. He is motivated by the need for attention and frequently attempts to break up important conversations which are over his head by injecting non-sense or simply being a nuisance by making funny noises at the dinner table and such.

There are times when the kids parents simply tell him to be quite or leave the table. This especially when the adults are having an interesting and important conversation.

This situation is very analogous to the the global climate change discussion. For scientists and other intelligent people, the issues are complex enough and nuanced enough as it is, and the interjection of nonsense from a self-interested group (or normally from their minions) is legitimately unwelcome even among those who have a disposition toward giving everyone a voice.

So I should selectively ban the posts that I feel are not adult enough just because I am the OP.
But then why was there a need to create a sub on reddit for a "discussion" when, it seems, the people behind that "thread" were exclusively AGW believers only.

My point is don't call it a "discussion" but a private club then...

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4690

Merit: 1276

Quote from: Littleshop on May 17, 2014, 12:06:44 PM

...
In a public place you cannot shut them up, you must leave, argue or put up with it. In a private setting that you control (like Reddit) you can ban them.

My sister and brother-in-law have a kid and they encourage him to feel the freedom to express himself. It is the opposite of a 'children should be seen and no heard' mentality from an earlier time.

The trouble is that he is a kid and has relatively little ability to engage in thoughtful conversation. He is motivated by the need for attention and frequently attempts to break up important conversations which are over his head by injecting non-sense or simply being a nuisance by making funny noises at the dinner table and such.

There are times when the kids parents simply tell him to be quite or leave the table. This especially when the adults are having an interesting and important conversation.

This situation is very analogous to the the global climate change discussion. For scientists and other intelligent people, the issues are complex enough and nuanced enough as it is, and the interjection of nonsense from a self-interested group (or normally from their minions) is legitimately unwelcome even among those who have a disposition toward giving everyone a voice.

KonstantinosM

hero member

Activity: 1492

Merit: 763

Life is a taxable event

Quote from: hdbuck on May 16, 2014, 08:00:08 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on May 16, 2014, 02:44:20 AM

Funny how a theory of global destruction is such a big deal when radiation from Fukushima is blanketing the globe and is a very real threat proven to exist. Why do you consider this less of a threat?

yea, excalty! this is coming much more sooner than the GW scam. Scientifical proofs and conclusions are just apocalyptic yet no one talks about it (i wouldnt even assume being off limit when considering Japanese people as an "endangered specie" from now on... as the next big earthquake there will finish their country once and for all).
GW fanatics just cant interpret proofs objectively, they just seem to respond to unprovable theories whilst denying (or maybe just dont care about) real and imminent threats.

GW is just a fucking diversion to fool the average guy about what's really going on.. until it's too late..

Watch the full video. This is plain wrong. Fukushima is not a problem to anyone living outside of an extremely small area in japan and even for them it's mostly paranoia.

Climate change is fucking up a whole lot of people's lives already. It has killed a lot of people. This is not an unsubstantiated claim. During a catastrophic event the extra water may be all that knocked over and killed a lot of people's families. Same thing goes about heatwaves, drying out of certain areas and wild-fires.

We only have one planet so we can't afford to be careless with it.

KonstantinosM

hero member

Activity: 1492

Merit: 763

Life is a taxable event

Quote from: SgtMoth on May 15, 2014, 07:22:00 PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2629171/Climate-change-scientist-claims-forced-new-job-McCarthy-style-witch-hunt-academics-world.html

Not only did he get paid off to deny what is really happening but he is also playing the fake victim card. That's the most ridiculous pile of garbage ever. I'll be sure never to read the dailymail.co.uk.

I wouldn't do that even if someone tried to buy me out. Apparently not everyone has the same level of integrity.

Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 186. (Read 636443 times)