When business realized how responsive the public was to her logic, they went after her with extraordinary vengeance, perfecting techniques that are used to this day, like greenwashing — the creation of industry front groups funded by corporations, the use of paid scientists to attack academic scientists, the manipulation of the media to sow doubt in people's
minds about complex issues.
However, this model glosses over the reality of how opinions are formed, namely the many factors at work in how people make up
their minds about complex issues.
Readers deserve facts, so they can make up
their minds about complex issues such as education policies.
Not exact matches
If a goal of realclimate is to inform laypeople of
issues in climate science, then arrogance in this forum will only appeal to its most unquestioning adherents while driving away those who prefer to keep an open
mind about a
complex and dynamic field.
Well since it is
about accepting a very
complex subject that is not always amenable to discussing various
issues in sound bites and because the worst impacts occur in the future I don't think it can be definitive in the
minds of many people.
We can argue
about many aspects related to climatology (such as rate of temperature increase & measurement statistics, etc.) but these
issues tend to be far too
complex for most people and to my
mind tend to cloud judgment.