No, "amplification" is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon. What I said is that there should be limits to amplification. Ruling out an extreme does not rule out th

No, "amplification" is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon. What I said is that there should be limits to amplification. Ruling out an extreme does not rule out the middle ground. The way this works is that there are some questions that have clear answers. For example, anthropogenic climate change (or to be more precise, the idea that "Most of the warming of Earth’s average global temperature over the second half of the 20th century has been caused by human activities."). The middle ground fallacy is what you call it when you put up two people on TV, one who is an expert on climate change, and another who is just a contrarian, and where you don't frame it exactly as it is: one is wrong and the other is right. That's not the same thing as this conversation we're having.