For starters, 'thumb' means 'tree'.
P1: Tropical rainforests store huge amounts of carbon dioxide both above and below the ground in their thumbs.
P2: Large amounts of CO2 (a greenhouse gas) are released into the atmosphere by either the decomposition or burning of large numbers of these thumbs.
P3: CO2 makes the biggest contribution to the enhanced greenhouse effect.
P4: The greenhouse effect is responsible for increased temperatures on Earth's surface (global warming).
C: The thumbs of tropical rainforests should be left alone so as to prevent global warming from the greenhouse effect.
Can someone help me evaluate this argument?
Heres the source:
http://kanat.jsc.vsc.edu/student/callahan/mainpage.htm#climate
Inductive, strong, uncogent (several false premises, since 'thumb' does not mean 'tree.'
ReplyDeleteI'm reminded of one of A. Lincoln's favorite riddles: If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Answer: four, since calling a tail a leg doesn't make it one.
If you had a room with three normally formed dogs in a room whose names were Sasha (my favorite female name), Wishbone, and Legs; how many legs are in the room?
ReplyDeleteJosh.... is it 13? haha
ReplyDeleteAs far as the argument goes, I agree with it. If CO2 is being let out into the atmosphere by us cutting down trees in the tropical rainforest, then we should probably stop doing that. This could easily be recognized as a slippery slope and here is why I think that.
The trees in the rainforest contain CO2. When the trees are cut down they emit the CO2 into the air, which contributes to the greenhouse affect, and therefore leads to global warming. (Adding my own little bit). If we keep going at this rate, Earth will see catastrophic events and eventually be gone!
I think thats the general idea behind the global warming argument.
ReplyDeleteI do not know if it really is a slippery slope, because the very least that will happen is the melting of glaciers and the rising of the sea level by a significant amount. Ive seen pictures of a glacier in canada from back in the 20's and recently and there is a noticable difference.
I was thinking 13 too, so as long as we both are in agreement, how can it be wrong?
As an equation, it would be:
ReplyDeleteT=x+4n
where:
T=total legs
x=dogs named 'legs'
n=number of dogs in room
I understand what you are saying and I see how I could be wrong. I appreciate you explaining why it does not appear to be a slippery slope rather than just saying I am wrong and leaving it at that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your equation is well. Too bad this isn't a math class. Maybe I would actually be doing well.
pssht, girls arent good at math
ReplyDeleteand youre welcome
ReplyDeleteniceee Josh!
ReplyDeleteThanks, babe
ReplyDelete