The only one affected by the outcome in Pascal’s Wager is you.

I can see that’s true in a way. However, both Pascal and John are using similar-style of arguments to try to persuade others to follow a certain course of action. In that way, it affects others.

After you’re dead. Without anyone else being able to make of falsify predictions.

Assuming the God of the Gaps, Pascal isn’t making any falsifiable claims; I agree.

(My qualification there is because I don’t know if Pascal made any separate, scientific claims about the existence of God.)

That’s not hardly comparable to climate change, even if the accuracy of our predictions relating to it leaves a lot to be desired yet.

Any falsifiable claims made about climate change (or the lack of it) are being ignored by John as irrelevant. He is focussing on climate predictions in the future; these claims are temporarily unfalsifiable. The experiment involves waiting.

I am not claiming that the evidence or science behind climate change is the same as (or even analogous to) the evidence or science behind the existence of Hell. If that is how it seems, I apologise for my lack of clarity.

I am merely claiming that the structure to this fallacious argument about climate change is analogous to the structure of a much more famous fallacious argument about Hell.

This guy does manage to turn the issue into Pascal’s Wager, but that’s just him and his inept argumentation, and is despite the subject, not because of it.

Hear, hear!

That’s not hardly comparable to climate change, even if the accuracy of our predictions relating to it leaves a lot to be desired yet.

This guy does manage to turn the issue into Pascal’s Wager, but that’s just him and his inept argumentation, and is despite the subject, not because of it.

Yes, I weighed up that issue. I decided it was best to include the link but play it down.

You’ll notice on this one I didn’t start by saying “Go watch the video, and then read my argument.” I left it to the end, and deprecated the need to watch it.

Speaking of links, WordPress’s inability to handle apostophes in hyperlinks rears its ugly head again. It happened quite some time ago with Hanlon’s Razor; now with Pascal’s Wager. (The trick is to use %27 instead of a literal apostrophe.) [Ed: Fixed, thanks!]