It’s All Greek to Me
Via E&E News, here’s a leading climate skeptic’s explanation of his qualifications to pass judgment on climate science:
While he acknowledged he had no scientific credentials that would allow him to speak with authority on climate science, Monckton said he was uniquely qualified to explain the various logical fallacies that supporters of man-made climate change had engaged in to attack their critics “because I was classically trained.”
Yup, a knowledge of Ancient Greek is exactly what you need to understanding thermodynamics, statistics, and dynamic modeling. Next week he’ll explain how Aristotle disproved quantum physics.
Reader Comments
4 Replies to “It’s All Greek to Me”
Comments are closed.
About Dan
Dan Farber has written and taught on environmental and constitutional law as well as about contracts, jurisprudence and legislation. Currently at Berkeley Law, he has al…
READ more
I think that the criticism is a little unfair. What he meant (probably) was that he has a good understanding of logical fallacies (e.g. begging the question) so that he can easily detect when a logical error (as opposed to an error of scientific judgment or observation) has been made. And of course the truths of logic do not depend on climate and other empirical sciences.
I’d admit that it’s a little bit of a cheap shot — but only a little bit. The idea that all these brilliant scientists went astray because they didn’t understand syllogisms is the mark of a true crackpot — rather like saying that you can disprove Einstein because you did really well in 9th grade algebra.
I think that the criticism is a little unfair. What he meant (probably) was that he has a good understanding of logical fallacies (e.g. begging the question) so that he can easily detect when a logical error (as opposed to an error of scientific judgment or observation) has been made. And of course the truths of logic do not depend on climate and other empirical sciences.
I’d admit that it’s a little bit of a cheap shot — but only a little bit. The idea that all these brilliant scientists went astray because they didn’t understand syllogisms is the mark of a true crackpot — rather like saying that you can disprove Einstein because you did really well in 9th grade algebra.