preview

Richard Lindzen's Argument Analysis

Decent Essays

To say that the issue of climate is resolved in the United States of America would be a falsehood. It is a commonly heard claim that 97% of climate researchers believe that global warming is real (Skeptical Science, 2012), and one would think that such consensus would inspire action among all positions of government. However, there is still the minority of scientists who do not explicitly agree with, or completely deny these beliefs. One such scientist is Richard Lindzen, who argues that there is an emotional, propagandistic reason why there would be such a large percentage of scientists who believe that climate change is caused by human factors.

In a 2015 lecture, Lindzen expresses a distaste for climate science that is based on the motivations …show more content…

The data is presented in the form of information regarding rainfall in the region. The warrant here is that a decrease in rainfall would affect the Peruvian asparagus market whilst the argument is that the decrease in rainfall would cause the Peruvian economy to become strained. This information was created from Thompson’s own data and was also formed through the scientific process rather than using anecdotal evidence. Thus, from a scientist’s perspective, it may be more valuable than Lindzen’s …show more content…

As climate change is inherently a scientific topic, any claims regarding it should be founded in, well, science. A moral case may be presented as well, such as “We need to ensure that the earth will be a better place for our forebears.” Science should be discussed under the lens of morality supporting the creation of data and information, allowing the data itself to be questioned. Whether or not the data is ideologically motivated should be part of the discussion as well as the data that exists. However, there needs to be conflicting data to prove unethically collected data wrong. Should this be impossible to fulfill, it should be assumed that the data is sound until another data set proves it to be misleading or inaccurate. Arguably, this process may be seen as a fallacy itself; specifically, the Ad Ignorantum fallacy. This fallacy occurs when an argument is assumed to be true because there is no counter-argument. There is one key difference. This system expects to have conflicting arguments vying for superiority. It doesn’t require something to be true because nothing has proved it wrong, it expects it to be true because it hasn’t been proven wrong

Get Access