How is pointing out that Gelbspan never recieved a Pulitzer (a demonstrable fact), a “smear”?

Oh. You mean like pointing out that someone is associated with a group that received funding from Exxon-Mobile?

This site seems to have a strong focus on establishing that skeptics have skeletons in their closets … usually via some often tenuous connection to Exxon-Mobil. That is defended as being within the “public’s right to know” when evaluating any statements they make or scientific papers that they author.

Fair enough. And it is also the public’s right to know that Ross Gelbspan’s claim to a Pulitzer Prize is false when evaluating his statements.

to outlaw non-IPCC thinking? It’s only a matter of time, I suppose? In any case, a skeptic like me (whom I am sure you would designate as a climate change denier, actually care a lot about the environment, which is why I am a supporter of nuclear power, as well as capitalism and property rights, which intrinsically promotes a good environment. I am also big on integrity, which is one reason I dislike desmogblog’s spin and smear strategy. And I consider the indivudual rights as the most fundemental aspect of a modern society (i.e. no hatred for people here).

Climate change denier? Are you trying to link those who question “Climate Change” to Holocaust deniers? One is a historical fact, the the is a theory. I personally see “Climate Change ” as being along the same lines as Y2K. That does not mean I don’t care about nature. The Romans used cui bono to find the truth. Who benifits from the “Climate Change” spin. 1) Exxon- They can now raise the price of fuel to as high as they want to be seen as being environmental. 2) US military/US Government- any distraction causing fear is good. 3) The Media- gives them something to report on ad naseum.