A very interesting synopsis of the denier movement, that shows the historical pattern to confuse and fog the debate, giving fuel to the sheep that so what to ignore. A good article, some highlights:
As she left a meeting with the head of the international climate panel, however, a staffer had some news for her. A conservative think tank long funded by ExxonMobil, she told Boxer, had offered scientists $10,000 to write articles undercutting the new report and the computer-based climate models it is based on. "I realized," says Boxer, "there was a movement behind this that just wasn't giving up."
Since the late 1980s, this well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change....
they are emphasizing a new theme. Even if the world is warming now, and even if that warming is due in part to the greenhouse gases emitted by burning fossil fuels, there's nothing to worry about. As Lindzen wrote in a guest editorial in NEWSWEEK International in April, "There is no compelling evidence that the warming trend we've seen will amount to anything close to catastrophe."
What a shame that many Conservative bloggers invest all their passion attacking a truism, desperately attaching themselves to any rogue tidbit to justify their irrational stubbornness. Measurable science has somehow been bastardized into mere opinion. You can offer a thousand examples of glaciers in retreat, but all we hear is Gore was wrong about Kilimanjaro. Warming trends everywhere, but they focus on a cold season anywhere they can find one on the globe. For every dissenting paper, a thousand in support, yet they cling to the denier, as though a balance exists. I'm all for debate, all for not stifling opinion, but I'm also of the mindset that every lunatic doesn't merit a podium. Apparently, common sense isn't so common.