Climate Myths You'll Hear This Week

motherjones.com

5 points·jaap_w··7 comments

On the whole, MJ is one of the worst sources for news or information on the internet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic)

EpicEng is right. I wasn't saying the article is bad, incorrect or anything else because of the source.

I was just saying the source is crap, it's on the same level as AlterNet. Surely there is a source without such an overt political agenda that can relay the same information?

I am right. You can't dismiss an article simply because it comes from fox news or msnbc and it might disagree with your own internal views. You must evaluate the article and the assertions within on it's own merit if you're going to be taken seriously in academia or legal settings.

> I wasn't saying the article is bad, incorrect or anything else because of the source.

Hm, sure.

> I was just saying the source is crap.

I know exactly what you were saying, and it's a fallacy. Read about genetic fallacies and ad hominem then retract your defense.

I'm sure that throwing around the names of logical fallacies makes you feel smarter, but are you really saying that the history or reputation if a source should be completely ignored? It's perfectly valid to be skeptical of a source based on their past behavior. That doesn't mean you just disregard what they say, but the OP didn't do that. Hence "straw man".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com