A Question of Logic

Incredible Technology: How to Map a Lightning Strike

May I ask you a question? If I lay a pile of dry sticks in preparation for a bonfire in my garden, and a bolt of lightning strikes those dry sticks, are the dry sticks responsible for the fire, or the bolt of lightning?  Clearly the agent is the lightning. Do we all agree?

So in the same way if there is a large dry forest, say, in California, and a bolt of lightning creates a conflagration, would we say that the forest is responsible for the fire or the bolt of lightning?

Would we say that we must cut down all forests in order to avoid forest fires? No, that would be a hysterical reaction. We cannot blame the forest for being large or for being dry, since the agent of the conflagration is the lightning.

If the Sun sends its radiation some 93 million miles through space and the infrared encounters a tarred road and makes the tar melt, do we then blame the tar? No, for that would not be logical. The tar is blameless – the agent is the infrared.

If in the intense heat of a summer’s day the railway lines buckle, are we to tear up all railway lines and accuse them of being the culprit?  No, that would be stupid, would it not, as the agent for the heating is the infrared radiation.

Carbon Dioxide is a well known trace gas, well known as a refrigerant, but when the Sun shines the Carbon Dioxide will absorb the radiation and warm up. The question is simple. Is the Carbon Dioxide responsible for the warming or the infrared radiation? .

Clearly the Carbon Dioxide is being warmed, in no way is it responsible for the warming. The cause of the warming is the infrared. Do we all agree?


PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.

Comments (4)

  • Avatar

    Al Shelton

    |

    Yes . But then what?
    The CO2 , being a gas then the warming from the IR causes the CO2 to expand and rise —right?
    Or, does it simply warm the O2 and N2 nearby?
    The warmed air then must still rise or in conjunction with the water cycle. No??
    Anyway, I cannot believe that the CO2 [gas] “traps heat” like a blanket. [solid ].

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Boris Badenov

    |

    Another question of logic is, how can one little ol’ molecule, 1 out of 1036(give or take) can change the surrounding molecules. Now if your talking about Dihydrogen Monoxide we may be getting somewhere, but that doesn’t fall into the alarmist category of being scary and controlling.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Graeme Mochrie

    |

    Logic is a valuable tool, but can be a dangerous friend if you start with a false premise.

    Analogy is a valuable tool, but can be a dangerous friend if you think it is equivalent to the situation you are describing.

    Empirical evidence is what matters and in the case of CO2 this seems to be absent.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Michael G Affleck

    |

    That kind of logic is puerile.
    It should be completely obvious that fault/responsibility is a meaningless determination. Blame can only be associated with an event that can be avoided.
    It is the combination of two things together that are the cause of the undesirable outcome. To prove this, take one or the other out of the picture in each case and observe the outcome.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via