If you are an adherent of sound scientific method, you must NECESSARILY be a
skeptic in this as in all other areas of inquiry, and the «
climate scientists» complicit in the push for the abrogation of scientific method are
by definition NOT «doing science, gathering data, testing,» but rather presenting the seeming of scientific investigation while all the while using that masquerade to
advance public policy measures predicated upon malicious nonsense.
As part of our contribution, CSW commented that the document might carry greater relevance for decision - makers who want to
advance a needed adaptation agenda to an unconvinced or
climate -
skeptic audience (a very real possibility)
by including more explicit language on the ways in which
climate change issues can be framed to appeal to diverse groups — for example, emphasizing the potential damages to people and property to one community, the negative impacts to industry in another.