Arguing that something happening one way in the past means it can only happen that way is an illogical appeal to history.
Climate Illogic: Appealing to history to predict the future is often illogical
Tom Harris’ commentaries intended to impede, not advance, public understanding of climate science
Harris’ stated goals in his commentaries are diametrically opposed to the language and arguments he uses in support of those goals. Either he’s incompetent at public relations, or he’s not actually interested in moving forward the public debate on industrial climate disruption.
Tom Harris’ recent commentaries rife with errors and illogic
Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition is calling for the end of illogical arguments in the public discussion about climate disruption. But it’s hard to take his calls serious given all the illogical arguments and errors he makes in his various commentaries. Part Two of Six.
Tom Harris – hypocritical peddler of deceitful climate change editorials (corrected)
S&R reviewed eight related commentaries written by Tom Harris of the International Climate Science Coalition since mid-December. We found that the commentaries represent tone trolling and are packed them with distortions, errors, hypocrisy, and more. Part One of Six.
Climate Illogic: Poisoning discussion is easier than countering climate science
If you can’t dispute the facts, attacking your opponent may distort the debate before it even starts.
Climate Illogic: don’t be distracted by irrational assertions of global warming catastrophe and crisis
“Catastrophic global warming” and “global warming crisis” are both illogical, straw man style red herrings.
James Taylor of Heartland Institute twists new AMS study to cast doubt upon industrial climate disruption consensus
Heartland’s James M. Taylor adds yet another study to his long habit of distorting surveys and studies to fit his industrial climate disruption-denier narrative.
Climate Illogic: Sometimes arguing from authority is the logical thing to do
Industrial climate disruption is sufficiently complicated that arguing from authority – even a consensus of authorities – is not only justified, it’s entirely logical.
Climate Illogic: industrial climate disruption is not a popularity contest
Overwhelming evidence is why the vast majority of climate experts agree industrial climate disruption is real. But climate disruption deniers want you to believe it’s all a popularity contest.
Climate Illogic: the flat Earth consensus
It’s most illogical for climate disruption deniers to arguing against the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding the industrial nature of climate disruption using the flat Earth analogy.
