4 ms·

Fine example of the platform's weakness: http://en.arguman.org/there-is-no-such-thing-as-global-warming http://en.arguman.org/there-is-no-such-thing-as-global-w

by zbyte64 11y ago

Fine example of the platform's weakness: http://en.arguman.org/there-is-no-such-thing-as-global-warming http://en.arguman.org/there-is-no-such-thing-as-global-warmi... Inject enough irrelevant counterarguments and you get the same quasi-controversy with the same amount of confusion for the layman.

asgard1024 11y ago
I would say, based on the number of supporters of the existing arguments, it is not really a good example of weakness.. But yeah, the debate here lacks some good arguments. For example, one of the main reasons why we know global warming is not caused by the sun (aside from direct observation) is the fact that nights/winters/poles are getting warmer than days/summers/tropics, and that stratosphere is cooling. Perhaps the weakness of the platform is that it doesn't distinguish between rational (thoughts) and empirical (facts) arguments?
planfaster 11y ago
That's a strength. I didn't know about the Plasma argument and it looks like a good one. Someone is yet to post a good refutation to it there. The weakness is in allowing those who disagree to throw a tantrum, be impolite, use curse words, and attack other participants, such as this post: "What the fuck has this to do with global warming?? electric currents and your shitty plasma have nothing to do with this, literally 99% of your spam quotes are irrelevant quotes" When it's obvious from the "spam" arguments posted that the Earth sits within a system that is 99% plasma. The problem with this system is that you will get many participants Skissor (author of the above-quoted pearl) asking for arguments to be censored or removed. This is the major problem that forums everywhere have yet to solve - when enough of the majority deem the minority's point of view as "trolling" as asks that it be censored, there is no real debate.

by zbyte64 11y ago

asgard1024 11y ago

I would say, based on the number of supporters of the existing arguments, it is not really a good example of weakness.. But yeah, the debate here lacks some good arguments. For example, one of the main reasons why we know global warming is not caused by the sun (aside from direct observation) is the fact that nights/winters/poles are getting warmer than days/summers/tropics, and that stratosphere is cooling. Perhaps the weakness of the platform is that it doesn't distinguish between rational (thoughts) and empirical (facts) arguments?

planfaster 11y ago

That's a strength. I didn't know about the Plasma argument and it looks like a good one. Someone is yet to post a good refutation to it there. The weakness is in allowing those who disagree to throw a tantrum, be impolite, use curse words, and attack other participants, such as this post: "What the fuck has this to do with global warming?? electric currents and your shitty plasma have nothing to do with this, literally 99% of your spam quotes are irrelevant quotes" When it's obvious from the "spam" arguments posted that the Earth sits within a system that is 99% plasma. The problem with this system is that you will get many participants Skissor (author of the above-quoted pearl) asking for arguments to be censored or removed. This is the major problem that forums everywhere have yet to solve - when enough of the majority deem the minority's point of view as "trolling" as asks that it be censored, there is no real debate.