Dogs and Deniers

What we say to deniers:

---

What Deniers Hear

Update: Great examples of this phenomenon at work here and here.

Lucia is coming after me for this piece. I said in its defense:

The idiocracy thing was just a throwaway, (the “prattlings” thing being Vinny’s and not mine; North Americans usually don’t have the word “prattling” in our top-of-mind vocabularies) but my efforts at Curry’s were not, and it was exactly those that prompted my Dogs and Deniers piece.

As a direct result of that discussion, I was quite specifically thinking of hunter as prototypical of those who prolifically ignore what one says, and quite vigorously and even viciously go after what they prefer to imagine one has said instead.

There are plenty of reasons, some fair and some unfair, that we or our less informed allies come off looking like the woman in the cartoon. But the fact that people construct weak arguments because they still manage to hold on to a thread of trust is better than the alternative, presuming the trust is warranted. (The alternative being a committed distrust of a scientific community that mostly means well and mostly does well.)

So the question, as always, comes down to trust (or authority) for most people. The more quantitatively adept may go beyond trust, aware that scientific authority requires hard work to challenge. But we still find ourselves constantly called upon to defend caricatures of what we are saying, constantly thrown into political boxes, constantly subject to accusations of highly implausible motivations and B-movie conspiracies.

If you don’t know what I mean, go look at the thread at Curry’s, check out the thrust of what I said at various points, and the parry of the responses. Almost every attempt to focus on reality and reality-based evidence is replied to by arguments from politics tainted with hostility and anger.

Update: Another excellent example of the Puppy Position from comments at Kloor's:

Reasons to be skeptical:

• 1) government funded science concludes: we need more government to fund more science. And, oh by the way, a few billions for my rent seeking buddies.
• 2) Al Gore lied. Argue if you must.
• 3) None of the alternatives, except maybe nuclear, will work
• 4) Nuclear, which might actually work, is eschewed
• 5) Big-Oil-Funded disinformation campaign. Not trusting my economic future to folks who peddle this drivel.
• 6) Odds, for now, of implementing/enforcing an effective global CO2 reduction program: 0%.
• 7) Odds that any seemingly global CO2 reduction program is actually a brazen third world money grab: 100%
• 8) RC, CP, and the “scientific” echo chambers.
• 9) Odds that global decarbonization will significantly restrict freedoms: 100%
• 10) Good things that flow from restricted freedom: none
• 11) Bad things that flow from restricted freedom: lots and lots.
• 12) Odds of enormous unintended consequences flowing from aforementioned CO2 reduction program: 100%
• 13) Scientists behaving badly, then pretending not to have behaved badly, then pretending that it doesn’t matter because… well we’re scientists.
• 14) Other scientists tolerating/excusing scientists who behave badly.
• 14) Scientists pretending to understand the consequences of warming. They don’t. And benefits are categorically ignored.
• 15) Odds that Dr. Murphy will reveal a new, different, and certain planetary crises the minute humanity sinks its disposable resources in a decarbonization program to forestall the maybe, might-be problem of global warming: I’d rather not find out.

It’s a cost benefit analysis and you have to weigh both -or, more accurately, all - sides. Of course, world view (politics) affects percieved costs. Of course, percieved trust in the messenger affects the percieved benefit. Ever was it thus.

Our best course of action, for now, is to do, basically, nothing. Over time, uncertainties in climate sciences will resolve, energy technology will improve, wealth will accrue. Acting now would be premature and too risky.

Fifteen Sixteen "reasons" to be skeptical and not a particle of substance!

Update: Willard has Grypo Saurus's version of current events.