Replies

When the “intellectuals” continue to lie, why should I sit around and try to analyze every statement to see if maybe, just maybe, they are not lying this time? If people on FR are dismissive of the global warming it is not a rejection of authority or expertise but rather a recognition that those claiming authority and expertise have been proved frauds.

It seems to me that the the true anti-intellectuals are those that supported poor scientific processes, bullying of dissenting views, and manipulation of data. The true anti-intellectuals are the people who continue to ignore what is right in front of their faces and rely on an incestuous, ideologically driven academia to define expertise. The anti-intellectuals are those who refuse to see that a snake oil salesmen with a Ph.D. is still a snake oil salesman.

When the “intellectuals” continue to lie, why should I sit around and try to analyze every statement to see if maybe, just maybe, they are not lying this time?

Moran correctly notes the politicization of the science. That's a real and serious problem, not least because it undermines the reliability of scientific endeavors in general.

But the underlying data are still there, and they show that something is going on. The problem is that it's impossible to discuss the data, because both sides are so polarized.

The "Algore" side of the debate has siezed on the data as justification for a broad program of social control. Seeing that, the "conservative" side of the debate rejects not only the program of social control; and they also reject the data.

Both sides are irresponsible.

Your post is a perfect example. You reject all data, because some of it is suspect. The problem being .... you'll probably never accept any data that comes from an "intellectual," because you've already decided they're all snake oil salesmen.