2011-09-10 12:30:57Climate Witchcraft and Post-Normal Science -- American Thinker
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Although this article, written by Norman Rogers*, was origianlly posted on American Thinker on July 28, 2011, I do not recall if it was specifically addressed on a general chat thread. Does anyone recall? Regardless, is their anything in it that deserves a new SkS rebuttal?

*Norman Rogers is a Senior Policy Advisor at the Heartland Institute and maintains a personal website For more on Norman Rogers, see the SkS general chat thread, Finally, a skeptic reaction to the Guide to Skepticism

 

 

2011-09-10 18:43:08Words in other peoples mouths.
Glenn Tamblyn

glenn@thefoodgallery.com...
58.168.138.54

Apart from a general rebuttal applied to a style that involves repeatedly putting words in other peoples mouths - and thoughts in their minds - I don't see what there is to rebut.

Unfortunately the effort needed to rebut every piece of right-wing wingnut diatribes simply isn't worth it - readers here ay SkS mainly won't have read this.

Rather than try to poke a finger into every hole in the dyke, a better strategy is to go get a bulldozer and start moving serious amounts of dirt. Responding to every bit of commentary on a blog somewhere is a loosing game. Most people don't read blogs about climate change, right wing politics etc. And of those who do, most are entrenched in their views anyway - I know I am.

Although the basis of SkS is rebuttal, we need to do as much as possible that is on the offense as well.

2011-09-10 19:20:56
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.120.94

People who pay attention to that kind of article are likely to be supporters of Ron Paul for president: articulate, convinced, and without a chance of making even a 10% impression on the situation.

2011-09-11 00:28:44Glenn
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

My question was "...is their anything in it (Rogers' article) that deserves a new SkS rebuttal?"

My working assumption is that all of the false claims and assertions made by Rogers have alreedy been rebuked by SkS, but I'm not qulaified enough to know that for certain.  

I neither suggsested nor envisioned that SkS would do a rebuttal of the paper per se.

2011-09-11 00:32:37nealjking
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

Aricles like Roger's provide ammunition (sound-bites if you will) to the climate denier drones who swarm the comment threads of mainstream media websites. Once in a while, an average pesron will actually read those comment threads.

2011-09-11 01:20:27
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.120.94

For this kind of article, I think we could wait until it shows up. I think it's written too inpenetrably to make much impression.