Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
fact vs data?
No doubt on that one.
IIRC the video THIS GRAPH IS WRONG hinged on a reassessment of the hockey stick that put a hump in the middle.
|
The 'reassessment' was conducted by a Heartland Institute ( Exxon-Mobil original funder ) creature. There can be no presumption of objectivity.
Playbook:
1) manufacture uncertainty
2) compete with the body of fact
3) establish a controversy
4) disingenuously demand proof over prediction
5) dispute any conclusion that might support regulation
6) deem data irrelevant
7) deem data not representative
8) deem expose' data not reliable
9) prepare for release, unfavorable studies before studies are published.
10) feed for-hire scientists contrarian sound bites which play well with ignorant reporters whom presume there's actually two sides to every story.
11) even though your product kills Americans, forbid regulators from lowering exposure limits, unless they can prove to the molecule what the exact 'safe' limit should be.
12) intimidate regulators
13) out gun regulators
14) infiltrate the federal government
15) shape government policy
16) replace national experts with lackeys, industry lobbyists on pertinent advisory committees, panels.
17) debate the science to delay the policy debate
18) vilify any corporate-profit-threatening research as 'junk science'
19) sanctify corporate' bought-and-paid-for research as 'sound science'
20) product defense consultants do your bidding while you remain camouflaged
21) weaken federal regulatory agencies from the inside
22) elect your puppet president
23) staff the White House
24) nominate presidential appointees to all departments, agencies