…who are of course polar bears. Who else is fluffy and snow covered…? Yea, alright, but that’s just one example… OK, two examples… So… why polar bears, then?
Well, many scientists use ‘polar bears!’ as an argument for man made global warming… and why is that a bad thing?
For starters, it is an appeal to pity. An appeal to pity is not an argument in and of itself, and has no bearing on the debate at hand.
Secondly, polar bear populations are actually higher now than they were in the mid 20th century.
Thirdly, even if it were proved that polar bear populations are decreasing due to climate change, there is no way to link that argument to ‘Polar bear population decreases are mankind’s fault’, as there is no way to accurately test whether mankind can affect global temperature or not.(because there are other variables, including, but not limited to other heat sources such as the Sun and the core of the Earth)
Even if there weren’t other variables(an Earth without natural, gradual weather changes, and without rotating around the sun or containing a fluxing molten core), in order for the method of experimentation to be absolutely reliable, we would need to have a second group to compare to, a control group – an exact replica of Earth, only without mankind inhabiting it… but that’s not a very attractive idea, anyway.