Hey there, internet commenter.
You've been sent a link to this video
because someone is concerned that you are not
arguing to your utmost ability.
They're concerned you might have used a fallacy
to make an important point, thereby
undercutting your own claims.
The fallacy they're concerned you might have used
is moving the goalposts.
Moving the goalposts, sometimes called raising the bar,
is a fallacy where the win condition
for an opposing argument is constantly revised in response
to its successes.
Picture a soccer game.
A player has the ball and is rushing towards the goal.
There are no defenders in sight, and the field is wide open.
Just as the player is about to kick and score,
two opponents pop up out of nowhere
and literally move the goal out of the way of the ball.
ANNOUNCER: Let's have another giggle at the miss.
Effectively, in the face of defeat,
the defending side changes the very nature
of the game being played.
In conversation, it looks something like this.
Mike and Straw Mike are talking about climate change.
Things aren't too bad right now.
I'll be worried when there is a clear difference
in the climate.
Things are bad right now.
We have ice cores and tree rings.
We know clearly that the climate hasn't
been this bad for as long as humans have been around.
Those are indirect measurements.
You're making a leap of faith.
But what about all of those written climate records
from around the world going back 150 years?
150 years is nothing.
Show me written climate records going back a few thousand
years, and then maybe I will change my tune.
A common conclusion to this type of argument is the movement
of goalposts outside the arena to a place where the opposing
side simply cannot score.
It's impossible, for example, to provide written climate records
from before there were written climate records,
so the argument is over.
Instead of admitting defeat or reconsidering their position
in light of new information, the goalpost-mover
treats discussion like a game of Calvin ball,
or a game of soccer where they might win,
but only because their goal is two towns over,
encased in concrete, and buried 10 feet underground.
And I ask, is that really winning?
I hope this discussion of the moving the goalposts fallacy
has been helpful.
Happy conversing.