Wednesday, July 29, 2015

The Signs Are Everywhere - Part 2

You can access part one here.

Logical fallacies
The reason why there's a 97% consensus is because of the many lines of evidence that humans are causing global warming. Human fingerprints are being observed in heat escaping out to space, in the structure of the atmosphere and even in the changing seasons. Another denialist technique used to counter the weight of evidence is the logical fallacy.

The most common fallacious argument is that current climate change must be natural because climate has changed naturally in the past. This myth commits the logical fallacy of jumping to conclusions. It's like finding a dead body with a knife sticking out of its back, and arguing that the person must have died of natural causes because humans have died of natural causes in the past. The premise does not lead to the conclusion.


  1. I've been popping by, Lorne, to see what reaction these two videos might have stimulated. I have a sense that as the science gets ever more conclusive and the impacts loom ever more ominous it's not provoking an outcry for change. Most Canadians will still vote for parties committed to the continued expansion of our bitumen extractive industry. The science tells us that's potentially suicidal for ourselves and, ultimately, genocidal for not just our species but most life on Earth, yet we will still reward them with our votes.

    It's said that many business leaders know the reality and danger of climate change but disassociate themselves from that once they enter their corporate capacity.

    Our political leadership, Mulcair included, practice a similar form of cognitive dissonance placing a perceived responsibility to grow the economy, perpetually and exponentially, over any actual responsibility to protect the nation and our people. It makes me realize how, had asbestos carried the big bucks bounty that supposedly (fictionally anyway) we reap from bitumen, we'd still be mining the fibrous stuff and establishing ever greater cancer bombs around the Third World.

    1. I fear you are all too correct in your analysis, Mound. I read a piece today on The Huffington Post that you might find of interest,as it echoes your sentiments about our politicians. Here is an excerpt followed by the URL:

      Whether it's deck chairs on the Titanic, Nero fiddling while Rome burns or the boiling of frogs, there is no shortage of played out tropes to describe political inaction on climate change, but in Canada things are getting ridiculous. At this point it feels like the whole of Canada's political class has picked up instruments and is conducting an orchestral performance on a sinking ocean liner while the most egregious among them block women and children from boarding life boats and explaining that there is no proven link between iceberg strikes and sinking ships. Something needs to change.