Logical Fallacy of Insignificant / Insignificant Cause / Genuine but Insignificant Cause

The fallacy of insignificant cause is one of the many smokescreens that are used to cover the fact that the reasoning is based on one of the three fallacies of Agrippa's trilemma. Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regress, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This problem is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known without Divine revelation; however, that is not true. There is no reason to trust either logic or math without Divine revelation. Science is also limited to the pragmatic because of the weakness on human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma.

The Logical Fallacy of Insignificant / Insignificant Cause / Genuine but Insignificant Cause occurs when the identified cause is a genuine cause but not the main cause. It is not a fallacy to note every factor, even the less significant ones. The error here is in claiming that an insignificant cause is the main cause.

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Insignificant / Insignificant Cause / Genuine but Insignificant Cause

"Ken got the promotion because he has friends in high places."

That was a factor, but Ken also works hard. He knows his job and he understands the mission of the company. He always makes decisions with the goals of the company in mind. Ken is also respectful to authority. He is not a "yes" man but, when he does disagree, he does it in a way that those who supervise him can respect and accept. In fact, this is part of why Ken has friends in high places.

"In the last thirty years, we have increased CO2 by about one percent per year. We must stop man-made CO2 emissions."

The Earth began warming right after the Little Ice Age in the mid 1800s, and has increased 0.5 degrees C. in the last 100 years. It's impossible to tell whether this is a cyclical increase following the Genesis Flood or a continuing trend. Over the last decade and a half, the warming has been very close to zero. Over the last 150 years, there is very little correlation between temperature and human-generated CO2. There is no firm data that indicate the man-made CO2 is a factor at all. There are natural sources of CO2, but CO2 may be an insignificant cause. Climate-gate reduces the credibility of those pushing the agenda. Sun spots seem to be a greater factor than CO2. Natural CO2 is a greater factor if CO2 is a factor at all. Cloudiness has been largely overlooked in climate models.

• Does Carbon Dioxide Drive Global Warming?
• Climategate, Begging the Question
• Earth's Climate Thermostat

 
An ungodly-thinking website known as rationalwiki.org recently made an argument against this page. That argument is refuted here: https://www.SeekFind.net/Answer_to_Critic.html