This article is about the
Capitalist-CO2-Caused Coming Climate Change Catastrophe Cult
I usually call them "global warmunists", when I'm in a good mood !
Religious leaders invented fake news, although they prefer the phrase: 'Religious beliefs based on faith'.
Perhaps you can tell I've been an atheist since I was old enough to understand what the word means.
The "warmunists" are purveyors of secular fake news.
I don't believe in things no one can see, and I don't take predictions of the future seriously -- that's logical thinking.
And of course I don't take claims, and promises, of politicians seriously -- especially claims about the future climate !
The warmunists' primary fake news is the claim that CO2 levels control the climate, and the future climate can be predicted.
Their secondary fake news is hundreds of scary fantasy stories, about bad things that are allegedly going to happen, but never do, from adding more CO2 to the air by burning fossil fuels.
Warmunism is best described as a "secular religion".
Like any other religion, the beliefs are based on faith, not science, and logical fallacies are very common.
.
.
The warmunists' most common
logical fallacies:
.
.
(1) ad hominem ("to the man")
(character attacks):
Question the fairy tale of a coming climate catastrophe, and you will be character attacked, and often have your motives questioned, by being called a "science denier", or a "climate change denier".
.
Character attacks are used to justify the warmunists' usual refusals to debate their visions of a coming climate catastrophe.
.
Warmunists attack the man, not his science!
.
.
.
.
.
(2) argumentum ad populum:
(the belief that truth is determined by a vote).
Honest surveys show a majority of scientists, engineers and meteorologists don't agree with the fantasy of a coming climate catastrophe.
That's why warmunists create biased surveys with cleverly worded questions, delete responses they don't like, and misinterpret what many respondents actually believe.
The cleverly worded questions in most surveys would force my answers into the alleged 97% consensus, (simply because I believe humans are likely to have a small effect on the climate, although there is no definitive proof of that).
The fallacy is the belief that a consensus of scientists, especially when over 95%, proves the underlying science is right.
.
.
.
.
.
(3) post hoc ergo propter hoc
(after this, therefore because of it):
The warmunists claim:
- Burning fossil fuels added CO2 to the air from 1940 to 2015,
- And average temperature increased from 1975 to 2000,
- So, according to them, the CO2 increase MUST HAVE caused the average temperature increase!
.
That's not logic, because correlation is not causation.
Especially when the positive correlation of CO2 and average temperature comes and goes!
The positive correlation of CO2 and average temperature was for only 25 years (1975 to 2000).
But the "age of man made CO2" was three times longer -- the 75 years from 1940 to 2015.
Note:
I stop at 2015 because the temperature in 2016 was dominated by an El Nino (ENSO) heat release from the Pacific Ocean.
An El Nino is a steep, local heat spike.
The 2016 El Nino peak was similar to the 1998 El Nino peak.
Official measurements say the 2016 peak was a mere +0.1 degrees warmer than the 1998 peak.
El Ninos are natural cycles that have nothing to do with CO2.
But warmunists always include El Nino warming in their global average temperature data, allowing people believe they are CO2 greenhouse warming.
Since El Ninos are local events, they could be eliminated from the global average temperature data.
But showing more warming is ALWAYS more important to warmunists, than good, unbiased science!
.
.
The warmunists also never mention that ice core studies show CO2 peaks happened hundreds of years AFTER temperature peaks, in the past 800,0000 years.
.
.
.
.
.
(4) Straw man, and Either-or thinking
Warmunists will claim if you don't agree with ALL their beliefs, then you're a "climate change denier".
.
Or the warmunists will claim if you believe humans have some effect on the average temperature, that means you agree with their extreme beliefs (CO2 emissions control the climate).
.
Warmunists push people into two alternative straw men:
(a) "for us", and
(b) "against us".
.
Using two extreme straw men eliminates
the most logical conclusion about climate change:
(1) Earth's climate is always changing, from natural causes, based on real time historical temperature data, and almost all climate proxy temperature reconstructions.
(2) There may be additional climate changes caused by humans, but so far they are not obvious in the historical temperature data.
The average temperature has remained in a 1 degree C. range since 1880 -- that narrow range suggests only harmless natural temperature variations since 1880 -- nothing unusual to be blamed on humans!
.
.
.
.
.
(5) Circular reasoning:
Governments claim they hire climate modelers, or give them study grants, because of their superior scientific knowledge.
.
The climate modelers claim no government would hire them, or give them grants, if not for their superior science knowledge.
One form of circular reasoning is sometimes called a "mutual admiration society" -- leftist politicians and the leftists climate modelers they hire.
.
.
.
.
.
(6) Irrational appeals
(a) The smug statement:
A government bureaucrat "scientist" says:
"No respectable scientist denies the greenhouse theory of global warming!"
.
This statement is designed to falsely smear all skeptical scientists, as not worthy of respect, and especially not worthy of a scientific debate.
.
.
(b) The appeal to authority:
The bogus climate change surveys are fixed so "scientists" seem to agree about something.
Warmunists would also have you believe 'votes' of a small subset of scientists -- almost all of them on government payrolls -- is real science!
Surveys are an appeal to authority.
In the history of science, a consensus has been a very good leading indicator that the underlying scientific belief would eventually be proven wrong!