Skip to comments.A response to Dr. Paul Bain’s use of ‘denier’ in the scientific literature
Posted on 06/22/2012 7:32:17 PM PDT by Rocky
The tragic thing about the thoughtless use of a stereotype (denier) is that it reveals that you really think of people in terms of its projected meaning. In particular, even in your response you seem to equate the term skeptic with denier of AGW.
For this honest doubt and skepticism that the highly complex global climate models are correct you have the temerity to socially stigmatize them in a scientific journal with a catch-all term that implies that they are as morally reprehensible as those that deny that the Nazi Holocaust of genocide against the Jews?
(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...
Read the entire response at the link.
AGW has become the eugenics of the 21st century ideaolgy packaged as science but failing the test.
The sad part is the we really should be studying climate change and what part CO2 has in a very complex phenomena.
The author uses a great quote from Feynman, and also points out that the scary event which is likely to occur in the future is a rapid cooling of the earth. It really is an excellent letter.
The letter is great. I’m frustrated that it was important and necessary to write it.
It should also be noted that describing skepticism as denial is a term increasingly used in the social science literature on climate change (e.g. in Global Environmental Change, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Routledge Handbook of Climate Change and Society), and is used informally by some within the climate science community.It blows my mind that there are multiple journals dedicated to the "social science of climate change" (whatever that is). I guess anything is possible when world government's are spreading billions of dollars around to get the results they want.
that just blew me away, and this will go down some rat-hole, never to be responded to directly, never to see the light of day.
The Left uses labels like “denier” and “racist” to shut off debate on important subjects. I share your frustration that the press has been so dominated by the Left that this word (denier) continues to occur in publications with regularity.
Actually, the fact that the press is overrun by lefties has made the opposition more careful, and therefore more dependable, whereas liberals have gotten sloppy and careless because they usually get a pass on their rubbish.
The titles of those publications give me chills. These people are so persuaded that their intended results are correct that they are willing to subvert science to get what they want. And they are blatant about it.
Global Environmental Change
I suppose any change is bad. We are supposed to freeze things just the way they are. As though mankind has that power. The arrogance is astounding.
Journal of Environmental Psychology
Are they serious? Talk about the inmates running the asylum.
The link to the full letter, so that it will be easier to locate in the future.
I intend to do my part to give this letter wider circulation.
This letter has far broader impact than the title implies. It destroys the entire Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming religion.
I agree. It justifies skepticism and reveals CAGW to be a corrupt and dishonest attempt to gain support for a social belief system by leaning upon phony scientific claims and by attempting to close the debate by using ad hominem attacks.