Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre
I still suggest that shooting the message should happen, before shooting the messenger.
|
You wouldn't make much of a trial lawyer with that view. It sounds nice, but in the real world, we have "messengers" all over the map with all kinds of crazy views, and it is an essential part of the analysis to include the reliability of the messenger in the deliberations.
Quote:
|
Only then you could ask if he was mistaking or lying.
|
That's like saying, you first have to figure out if what the witness is saying really happened, and use that to assess the reliability of the witness. But we are forming an impression of what happened, and using the reliability of the various witnesses is a very central element in that process, just as it is in a courtroom.
Quote:
|
My list proved that at least there was some substantiation to tying climate to solar solar cycles.
|
None of which had anything to do with the OP, as has already been pointed out.
Quote:
|
Therefore the credentials of the messenger are irrelevant.
|
Again, that statement is simply absurd.
Quote:
|
Actually could it be that the global warming tyranny has generated "nutters"?
|
The "global warming tyranny", now there's a solid argument in favor of your position. Argument by labeling.
Quote:
|
Now of course you can routinely spout your vitriol on the messenger and dismiss the 400, but he is only showing what is publisehed peer reviewed.
|
"Vitriol"-- more argument by labeling. If you really had a leg to stand on, you would be a scientist, not a rhetoricist. If you believe that lists of citations constitutes an argument, then I suppose someone will just have to post the thousands of citations that refute your position. Of course, you'll just say that citations that dispute your conclusions are the "tyranny", so the more there are, the more it establishes your position. Convenient, that-- citation lists are only admissable in support of your opinion.
Quote:
|
And BTW, for the warmers, how much more years of not warming more than previous, are required to realize that there might be some problems with the IPCC stance?
|
We'd all love to cross that bridge if we come to it, believe me.