> 1. A preposterous assertion that there is a global conspiracy or bias > among scientists. I'll discuss this in more detail when I discuss > motives in regard to sentence 5. > > 2. A complete refusal to confront the *overwhelming* evidence that > disproves the assertions of climate skeptics. > > 3. A focus on trivia areas of confusion while ignoring the totality of > scientific agreement. > > 4. A focus on irrelevancies such as "alarmism" among scientist who, > yes, are truly alarmed. > > 5. What I call "bozo epistemology", a spurious attempt at > sophistication based on attempts to show that we really don't > understand anything.
I like this list. Seems to me that point 2 is the core strategy -- avoid confronting the evidence by any means necessary. The other points are tactics for dancing around the evidence. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
