I recently wrote another op-ed for ABC News (Australia), in which I pointed out that an Australian Senator, Nick Minchin, had indicated that he rejects a new government report on climate change because of some information he read from a blog by a climate scientist who is almost certainly Roy Spencer. If you read the op-ed and compare it with what I’ve written about Orrin Hatch and certain members of the Utah Legislature, it will be clear that I have developed a certain strategy. Here it is.
- Debunk the main claims of prominent climate contrarians (e.g., Monckton and Spencer).
- Watch for politicians who justify their contrarian stances by citing said debunked nonsense.
- Publicly point out that these politicians claim they are following the dictates of Reason and True Science, but in fact they are just swallowing easily debunked nonsense because that’s what they want to hear.
- I then throw in a plea to follow the scientific consensus if you’re not willing to do the work to become an expert yourself.
Does this strategy work? It has convinced some people, but frankly, I’m not sure if this is the best strategy, or not. So what do you think, readers? Does my strategy seem like a good one, or should I be doing something else?