Go Back   AFA Forums > Religion, Unreason and Similar Tropes > Belief Central

Belief Central A place for the discussion of belief or a colony for repeated logical fallacies or misrepresentations.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 2nd December 2016, 03:19 PM
DanDare's Avatar
DanDare DanDare is offline
Religion or Reality, choose...
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 7,446
Default Dealing appropriately with unscience

This shows how to go about refuting claims of famous and powerful people who go out of the way to pronounce on science with bullshit.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/scientis...-change-claims
__________________
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government".
-Thomas Jefferson

Burden of proof is the obligation on somebody presenting a claim to provide evidence to support its truth (a warrant). Once evidence has been presented, it is up to any opposing "side" to show the evidence presented is not adequate. If claims were accepted without warrants, then every claim could simultaneously be claimed to be true.

History isn't written by the victors. It's written by the people with the time machines.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 2nd December 2016, 04:45 PM
pipbarber's Avatar
pipbarber pipbarber is online now
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,909
Default Re: Dealing appropriately with unscience

Thanks Dan, really interesting read with all the scientists notes added.

I can't cut and paste from the document but i found interesting the part where Ridley started discussing the idea of enriching poorer countries, helping to develop their economies, education etc as a way to for them to protect themselves against the negative externalities of climate change, as opposed to wholesale reductions in C02 emissions.

Now, i think both would be good but the latter seems unlikely given the history of the 20th century and recent political trends around the globe. Nevertheless, this is at least a rational approach that the conservatives (not the nutty right bigots) might consider adopting. It at least doesnt deny the fact of climate change, just how best to deal with it and it could be squeezed into the conservative worldview of 'growth and development.' (...everyone push...)

Just to reiterate, i personally think its a naive response but it is better than outright denial and i suspect there are conservatives stuck between outright denial and emissions reductions and choose the former for no other reason than their fear of the latter. Perhaps this could be some kind of a path into the debate for them - and away from the Malcolm Roberts of the world.
Reply With Quote
Like DanDare liked this post
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 01:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.