[ExI] Use of Irony, or Miscommunication? (Was Re: Global Temperatures to Decrease)
thespike at satx.rr.com
Fri Apr 18 16:38:54 UTC 2008
At 11:52 PM 4/17/2008 -0700, Lee wrote:
>It looks to me as though Alex saw through (thankfully!) your
>ironical retort, because he's rebutting the point you're *really*
>Or am I missing something? Recap: Lee links to "not warming", then
>Damien implies "global warming is not bullshit",
There were two steps in what I posted.
The first was to point out *from your own source* that what you were
citing made exactly the *contrary* argument to yours.
The second, bracketed after my name, was ironical: a sort of
equivalent bogus "argument" proving that traffic on highways is
slowing down. What my sarcastic counter-example tried to undermine
was the structure of inference in Lee's post.
>and then Alex rebuts
>the global warming "meme".
Alex failed to rebut anything I said, which is why I took his
comments the way I did (evidently in error). He *asserted* that
anthropogenic global climate change was non-existent, without making
any rebuttal of Lee's citation from a climate scientist. He expressed
<Where is the consensus? I can't see it. I must have missed the end
of the debate, I think it must have ended with all dissenters being
shot, thus argument settled. Shameful derailing of the scientific
process and a damning indictment of the state of our media driven
scientifically illiterate society. How can you defeat such ignorance
and blatant fraud? Show me the facts, not the opinions. >
--without any attempt (other than a reference to past fluctuations)
to show that this is incorrect:
>Researchers say the uncertainty in the observed value for any
>particular year is larger than these small temperature differences.
>What matters, they say, is the long-term upward trend.
Calling "I think it must have ended with all dissenters being shot" a
*rebuttal* is the same class of error made by the media when people
are said to have "refuted" a charge against them when all they've
done is *denied* it.
More information about the extropy-chat