>> If in some general discussion of climate change someone says (as a convenient shorthand) that "97% of climate scientists agree that AGW is a fact", what is the logical fallacy they are committing? I'd like to know so I can avoid it in future myself.
if you are just pointing out that a consensus exists and nothing more then it isn't a fallacy. This consensus exists. If on the other hand you are pointing out that the consensus exists for some other end, ie as a means of convincing people of the truth of any statement other than '97% of scientist think climate change is occurring', then it is a fallacy. Things are not true because people believe them right? Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 12:59:53 +1200 Subject: Re: If you can't disprove the science, you can always try suing From: lizj...@gmail.com To: everything-list@googlegroups.com On 9 April 2014 12:51, chris peck <chris_peck...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> It would still be a logical fallacy to proclaim something to be true >> >> because of who said it, rather than what was said. >> I think Liz has clarified what is actually being claimed here. Liz is under the misconception that I argue that climate change advocates only use this consensus figure. My argument is not that, it is that when they use this consensus figure they commit a logical fallacy. It relates to my argument that climate change advocates are as prone to logical fallacy and conspiracy theory as climate change deniers. This relates to the study that was pulled from the journal which in my view is as politically orientated a study as there can be. It only investigates those conspiracies dreamt up by climate change deniers and has nothing to say about how conspiracy theories are used to deflect attention from science generally. Ofcourse, when climate change advocates portray a climate change denier who is challenging the actual science as being 'in the bed of oil barons', they are doing precisely the same thing. When they dismiss what the climate change denier argues because '97% of scientists agree' they commit a fallacy. This latest row was trigger by nothing more controversial than that. OK, I'm quite happy to accept that they may be committing a logical fallacies - but I can't work out what it is from what you say here. So, to put it in simple terms (I hope) ... If in some general discussion of climate change someone says (as a convenient shorthand) that "97% of climate scientists agree that AGW is a fact", what is the logical fallacy they are committing? I'd like to know so I can avoid it in future myself. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
