Climate Change Report

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Latrinsorm

The second paragraph is an ad hominem, but it is not an accurate summation of the first paragraph. The absence of observation is not observation of absence.

---

I think you're wrong, Latrin.

I think this one works also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

I think you're wrong, Latrin.

I think this one works also.

---

In reference to the second one, if it's improper to question the guy's motives because of how he gets paid, you better start cutting al gore more slack.

Here's that article about the Sierra Club's board of directors and what they drive. You can tell they are very focused on the environment......

http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/22/si...zling-jaguars/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waywardgs

In reference to the second one, if it's improper to question the guy's motives because of how he gets paid, you better start cutting al gore more slack.

---

To be honest.. I think what Al Gore is doing is awesome. He's able to fleece people out of their money for making them feel guilty.. while obviously not leading by example.. and rarely getting called out on his hypocritical behavior by his blind followers.

Suckers!!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ZkSSURCm3F...gore-money.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waywardgs

In reference to the second one, if it's improper to question the guy's motives because of how he gets paid, you better start cutting al gore more slack.

---

The fallacy is claiming that his arguments are motivated by something else even though there is no proof of the correlation.

I think Al Gore has made it pretty obvious he's in the environmental game to make a quick buck, the evidence is all around.

Where is the proof that Moore's stances are motivated because his company is a paid consultant for some of these firms? Is it possible Moore came to these conclusions before he became a paid consultant? In any event cwolff didn't even go as far as you did and showed proof of Moore's financial dealings with energy companies, his argument all along has been "he's a paid shill for energy companies!"

That's another fallacy on cwolff's part right there; putting the onus on me to disprove his claim instead of him proving his claim.

cwolff is a walking fallacy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

The fallacy is claiming that his arguments are motivated by something else even though there is no proof of the correlation.

I think Al Gore has made it pretty obvious he's in the environmental game to make a quick buck, the evidence is all around.

Where is the proof that Moore's stances are motivated because his company is a paid consultant for some of these firms? Is it possible Moore came to these conclusions before he became a paid consultant? In any event cwolff didn't even go as far as you did and showed proof of Moore's financial dealings with energy companies, his argument all along has been "he's a paid shill for energy companies!"

That's another fallacy on cwolff's part right there; putting the onus on me to disprove his claim instead of him proving his claim.

cwolff is a walking fallacy!

---

You just did what you complained about other people doing. I'm not sure this line is going to be too successful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warriorbird

You just did what you complained about other people doing. I'm not sure this line is going to be too successful.

---

Tu quoque.

But seriously, what did I do that I complained about others doing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Tu quoque.

But seriously, what did I do that I complained about others doing?

---

You suggested somebody else prove a claim and then you whined that somebody asked you to. You don't actually want to play the fallacy game because you know the level of intellectual dishonesty you bring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warriorbird

You suggested somebody else prove a claim and then you whined that somebody asked you to.

---

I did?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warriorbird

You don't actually want to play the fallacy game because you know the level of intellectual dishonesty you bring.

---

I do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

I did?



I do?

---

Go back and actually read your post. I helpfully quoted it for you. Have a pleasant afternoon.