“Delivering Messages Is Not Communicating“. Thomas Fuller rambles on in an “op ed” guest post about how “they” are losing the battle of “messages”. “They” need over-dramatize because:
there really isn’t enough data to make a definitive case for the type of climate change the establishment needs to command immediate and decisive action. (emphasis mine)
Andrew Montford’s book The Hockey Stick Illusion? Not defeated by a blog! Hah! Stephen Schneider’s paper about the credibility of climate change authors? Somehow, libelous! Environmental videos featuring exploding children? In poor taste! (I’ll give you that one.) Hair-splitting denialist scientists like Lindzen, Spencer, Christy? Still splitting hairs!
But what is the denialist messaging, Thomas? Climategate fraud accusations – proven to be fabricated. Political and legal attacks on scientists – proven to be unjustifiable. Statistical evidence disputing global warming – proven to be misreprentative.
Your ‘message’ is one of insinuation about their motives. “Their” message is that denialists are provably lying. Pick a side.