Judith Curry, former email-deleting arch-witch of the AGW cult and now a victim of witch-hunts (the bad kind) from the AGW high priests since she decided to leave the sinking ship of the AGW dogma after the final nail has been hammered into it, suggests the following truce between the bed-wetting eco-fascists and the climate skeptics (aka realists):
- If someone presents research that you disagree with, either ignore it or rebut it, in the blogosphere or journal publication if the research is published.
- Attack the argument, not the person. No ad hominem attacks and no appeal to motive attacks. No argumentum ad populum.
- Do not use science to fight political battles
- Rediscover the joy of science, with debate as the spice of scientific discourse.
- Amnesty for war crimes on both sides (that fall short of formal research misconduct)
Good suggestions, Judith. As all my readers know, I am a distinguished bridge builder myself, and I am willing to negotiate with you.
I already ignore practially all so-called "research" coming from the high priests of the AGW dogma. Garbage in - garbage inbetween - garbage out!
And we must surely put an end to all these ad hominem/populum attacks from the ugly stinking AGW fanatics.
I especially agree about “Do not use science to fight political battles”. I wrote a very thoughtfull post about that myself a week ago (maybe you read it). It is paramount that we protect policy from the corrupting influence of science, just as it is paramount that we protect businesses and markets from the corrupting influence of policy.
But I disagree about the last point, though. Instead, I agree with Dr Marc Morano: the AGW dogmatists should be kicked while they are down and then publicly flogged. Only after that, we can have a truce like civilized people.
Quod cum vidisset Ham, pater Chanaan, verenda scilicet patris sui esse nuda, nuntiavit duobus fratribus suis foras.