Trump’s rejection of the Paris Climate Agreement seems like a small thing in the big picture of world affairs, but the fact that liberal news outlets are still buzzing about it days later may make you suspect it must have had some significance. And you would be right. As we have always known, “global warming” and now “climate change” have always been about redirected “global money” and “social change” engineered by the would-be grand benevolent overseers of a new world disorder. In short, it was always a scare tactic for a huge wealth redistribution scheme.
Hearing the continued buzz about it all reminded me I had written up the issue years ago in my book on biblical logic and fallacies. The arguments and conclusions I arrived at back then are just as true and all the more relevant today. Here’s the brief excerpt:
Fallacies of Cause. . . .
Cum Hoc Ergo Propert Hoc
A second Fallacy of Cause confuses simultaneity for causation. In other words, just because two things occur at or near the same time, someone may fallaciously assume that one caused the other. We call this Cum Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, which is Latin for “With this, therefore because of this.” The same exposure of folly as the After This Fallacy applies here to the With This Fallacy: a myriad of possible causes exist—many we may not even see or know of—for every given occurrence. This creates a high probability for false causes, even for events that seem to concur in time. Correlation in time cannot guarantee a causal link. . . .
Hot Air Pushes Global Warming
A more concerning example comes from Al Gore’s crusade against global warming. In his video An Inconvenient Truth, he uses correlational data to back his points: “If you look at a thousand years worth of temperature, and compare it to a thousand years of CO2, you can see how well they fit together.” He admits that the relationship between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and temperature is very complicated, but states that the most important relationship is this: “when there is more Carbon Dioxide, the temperature gets warmer, because it traps more heat from the sun inside.” Gore, famously now, presents pictures of melted glaciers and icecaps, along with warnings of increases in hurricanes and storms, flooded port cities due to rising ocean levels, and other climate catastrophes should we not immediately begin to reduce carbon emissions and our use of hydrocarbons (a scare-tactic, or Appeal to Fear). More importantly, he correlates modern human activity with the increase in carbon dioxide levels, implying that since humans cause global warming we must take drastic measures to reduce it.
Of course, all of this abuses the “With This” correlational fallacy many times over. To begin with, CO2 is not the primary cause of the “greenhouse effect” that results in higher temperatures. At least two other factors greatly outweigh it: solar activity and another more important greenhouse gas, water vapor. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine argues in a detailed paper, “Atmospheric temperature is regulated by the sun, which fluctuates in activity . . . by the green-house effect, largely caused by atmospheric water vapor (H2O); and by other phenomena that are more poorly understood.”1 Changes in solar radiation correlate more closely and for a longer period of history with temperature changes than do Gore’s graphs of CO2. As well, “While major greenhouse gas H2O substantially warms the Earth, minor greenhouse gases such as CO2 have little effect.”2
On top of this, while global temperatures have indeed risen in recent decades, proponents of Gore’s scare-tactics rarely mention that temperatures for centuries prior cooled considerably. The current rise merely corrects the previous “Little Ice Age.” The warming trend has occurred for much longer than Gore emphasizes, and has created effects that belie more of his claims:
Measurements show that the trend of seven inches per century increase in sea level and the shortening trend in average glacier length both began a century before 1940, yet eighty-four percent of total annual human hydrocarbon use occurred only after 1940. Moreover, neither of these trends has accelerated during the period between 1940 and 2007, while hydrocarbon use increased six fold.3
This scientific paper, which stands behind a petition signed by over 31,000 American scientists, concludes,
There are no experimental data to support the hypothesis that increases in human hydrocarbon use or in atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing or can be expected to cause unfavorable changes in global temperature, weather, or landscape. There is no reason to limit human production of CO2, CH4, or other minor greenhouse gases as has been proposed.4
So it seems that despite his claims about having a “scientific consensus” (a fallacious Appeal to Authority), other obvious, more relevant, and powerful causes exist to explain global temperature changes than those claimed by Al Gore (as well as the United Nations, and those who follow it). Al’s An Inconvenient Truth contains little more than one big craftily presented With This, Because of This Fallacy (packaged with a few other fallacies).
So why would Gore and others present the story this way? Note how he and other liberals intend to “solve” the problem: they propose a tax on carbon emissions as well as a global system of “cap-and-trade” on hydrocarbon usage. In plain language, these measures amount to a redistribution of wealth where more prosperous people and nations that use more fuel end up paying tons of money to third-world nations that do not. “Global Warming” simply acts as a mask and a fear factor for advancing the leftist political agenda, and increasing global government control of free and prosperous nations like the United States. Global warming is not an “inconvenient truth,” it is a convenient lie.5
(For much more on biblical critical thinking, logic, and scores of applications of logical fallacies, see Biblical Logic: In Theory and Practice.)
- Arthur B. Robinson, Noah E. Robinson, and Willie Soon, “Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide,” Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons 12:3 (Fall 2007), 79. Available at http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWReview_OISM150.pdf .(↩)
- Ibid., 82 (emphasis mine).(↩)
- Ibid., 89.(↩)
- See also Christopher C. Horner, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2007).(↩)