|
>>Or was the line I originally quoted meant sarcastically? Not really sarcastically. It was actually a strawman, but one aimed at drawing
people's attention to the confusion (in the minds of the conservationists)
about what their actual goals are. For instance, Greenpeace themselves admit (or used to admit) that a few
hundred harp seals clubbed to death by pelt collectors is not significant, but
they pursue the cause because the red blood on the white snow is such a gory
sight that it gets them lots of donations. They are a totally cynical,
manipulative organization. By using a Strawman argument like the 'floating icebergs' one, you make
people on both sides think 'what is the real issue?' Have you noticed that
'Global Warming' has been replaced by 'Climate Change' in leftist
arguments? Did you notice that the first half of Spring (in Australia) was
unusually hot? Did you notice that the greenies were running around saying that
it was a sign of Global Warming. Have you noticed that the second half of
Spring has been unusually cold? Then the greenies just went quiet on it. If you
pressed them they would just scream about climate change. Weather, by its very
nature is chaotic. It has been the staple topic of conversations for
housewives, fishermen and farmers since the epoch for a reason. Everyone can
spot patterns in it if they are told what patterns they should be looking for. Last night on TV (ABC of course) I saw a reference to Tuvalu. "Rising sea levels have been blamed for many of the problems facing Tuvalu" So how much does The Left think that sea levels have risen in Tuvalu? And how
much do they think they have risen in Sydney? Anything wrong with this picture. See the trick? Just try to move the argument onto the next stage and claim
victory in the previous one. Much of the world is now convinced that sea levels
have risen significantly around third world countries, but somehow the
capitalists have managed to spare the first world. Expressed that way, it
sounds silly, but it's true. Silly arguments sometimes require silly counter-arguments.
| 
