re: What are your reasons for believing climate change is "a hoax"

Because you want to do something about it so badly?

quote:

---

What we haven't seen are many rational reasons for people to believe in the conspirac

---

You declaring every point made in the thread invalid or, in a few cases.......simply ignoring them altogether......doesn't = truth. Again, this is rather self explanatory given as you have admitted.........you have no expertise.

So, in other words, you don't actually possess the ability to evaluate the counter arguments.

Which, of course, is why you've made no actual attempt to do so

quote:

---

I think we've pretty much seen in this thread that the sum total of your argument is "more experts agree with me".

---

AKA, the old appeal-to-authority fallacy.

quote:

---

AKA, the old appeal-to-authority fallacy.

---

Yep. 25 pages of

Assertion
"Nope, politically motivated conspiracy"

How do you know it's politically motivated?
"I can count.....more agree with me"

That doesn't actually refute the point.
"It's more rational to believe the most experts"

But, what do you, Pman have to actually say on the subject?
"Everyone agrees with me"

quote:

---

Would this standard of proof not be acceptable to you?

If 97% of climate scientists think that man made climate change is real is that standard of proof too low for you?

---

"I can count.....more agree with me"

You got nothing. Everyone in here sees you're naked.

If you want me to have an actual conversation on the subject, bring in someone who can contribute beyond their ability to count.

Lmao, I was expecting a BS response that ignored the post. Way to exceed my expectations.

quote:

---

If 97% of climate scientists think that man made climate change is real is that standard of proof too low for you?

---

You’re still doing it.

Take a basic logic class and get back to us once you figure out what you’re doing.

quote:

---

I'm not sure why you think this is a poor reason for drawing a conclusion

---

You aren't drawing a conclusion.

Other people are drawing conclusions. Then, you're counting them up.

I'm sorry you can't discern the difference.

quote:

---

Let's visit a hypothetical. Let's say that you're interested in building a plan for retirement. You consult with dozens of financial planners and the overwhelming majority insist that you invest in tax advantaged retirement accounts. Are you going to ignore them because a small minority that you talked to advise that you don't? Would you bet your retirement future on what 3% of financial planners say or what the 97% say?

---

One of two things will be true.

1. I will possess enough knowledge to also know the plans they recommend are good or to at least understand their arguments well enough to digest them and be able to fully explain them myself.

or.

2. I'll just be an ignorant frick and go with the odds. Which of course, is all you can do if you're an ignorant frick.

You can try to come at this 100 ways from Sunday dude.

Bottom line. You're basically a burger flipper agreeing with smart people because you can count. YOU.......PMAN.....bring nothing to the discussion yourself.

quote:

---

You’re still doing it.

Take a basic logic class and get back to us once you figure out what you’re doing.

---

He genuinely thinks that there's some form of example he can come up with that solves the primary fact that he doesn't know shite on the subject and has made zero attempt to know shite on it.

quote:

---

No, it’s not. It’s based upon a logical fallacy.

But there’s no convincing you.

---

Well come on man. He can count!! Ya gotta give him that!

Dude has literally ZERO sense of history going with that argument...........but hey, at this point.....point and laugh