4 ms·

We're talking facts here; and this data is from climatologists and backed up by studies. The conclusions are also not mine. What is there to rebut? This isn't

We're talking facts here; and this data is from climatologists and backed up by studies. The conclusions are also not mine. What is there to rebut? This isn't the point I was making. Climate change doesnt matter. I was illustrating the point of the article. Nobody will want to discuss climate change if there is such hostility and alarmism. By definition creating climate deniers. If the climate change folks are correct, and they very likely are correct, the point I was making was perfectly proven just now.

dwaltrip 8y ago
> We're talking facts here; and this data is from climatologists and backed up by studies. The conclusions are also not mine. > What is there to rebut? The rebuttal would look something like: "The data doesn't mean what you think it does due to X, Y, or Z." Or "Yes, this is true, but you are ignoring these other 10 aspects of the situation, which demand another interpretation". And so on. One piece of data doesn't mean anything by itself. It needs to be put into context and interpreted. This is the hard part, of course. > Nobody will want to discuss climate change if there is such hostility and alarmism. The hostility and alarmism is only unjustified if they are wrong about the facts of the matter and how to interpret them, and if the contrarian arguments brought forth are ignored without good reason or in bad faith. So, the particular details do actually matter. It is about climate change. Or whatever other specific topic. In my personal experience, the majority of contrarian arguments for climate change that I have seen have been put forth without due diligence or an understanding of how the argument fits into the broader picture. Which is what you would expect if the reality is that there isn't actually a strong opposing case.

4 ms·

We're talking facts here; and this data is from climatologists and backed up by studies. The conclusions are also not mine. What is there to rebut? This isn't

by sleepysysadmin 8y ago

dwaltrip 8y ago
> We're talking facts here; and this data is from climatologists and backed up by studies. The conclusions are also not mine. > What is there to rebut? The rebuttal would look something like: "The data doesn't mean what you think it does due to X, Y, or Z." Or "Yes, this is true, but you are ignoring these other 10 aspects of the situation, which demand another interpretation". And so on. One piece of data doesn't mean anything by itself. It needs to be put into context and interpreted. This is the hard part, of course. > Nobody will want to discuss climate change if there is such hostility and alarmism. The hostility and alarmism is only unjustified if they are wrong about the facts of the matter and how to interpret them, and if the contrarian arguments brought forth are ignored without good reason or in bad faith. So, the particular details do actually matter. It is about climate change. Or whatever other specific topic. In my personal experience, the majority of contrarian arguments for climate change that I have seen have been put forth without due diligence or an understanding of how the argument fits into the broader picture. Which is what you would expect if the reality is that there isn't actually a strong opposing case.