The wacky land of Amy Ridenour

If you click on the link that Kevin provides above, you'll find Amy responding in outrage to imagined slights from we at the DSB. She might actually be upset that we have been ignoring her altogether. And as for her specific complaint, frequent readers could confirm that as with the word "holocaust," or any other Nazi-charged language, the phrase "corporate whore" has, in my experience, never appeared in a DSB post. If Amy wants to assume the mantle by her own hand, I suppose that's her affair. But her defence (against an accusation we didn't make) is a little weak. She asks us to believe that coroporate funding of her website is negligible, and as evidence, she gives us - well, I guess she gives us her word. Given how reliable she is on subjects that can be tested against actual evidence (climate change for instance), we're a disinclined to swallow her line. If she really has tiny donations from 100,000 people, I suggest that she produce an auditable copy of her books or any other evidenced-based account of who's paying her bills. But given the company she keeps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Abramoff) and the interests that she defends (the oil industry, the health insurance lobby, etc.), we remain - what's her word? - skeptical.

I read her post.

She wants to be called a "skeptic", but this is just typical word play from the far right.

Can we just hit this nail on the head?: These guys are simple deniers. Skepticism is healthy; scientists are all by nature- and a long heritage- true skeptics.

We test and doubt each others work until only the fittest ideas survive. Sure, it can be hard for new ideas to emerge against a prevailing dogma, but they nevertheless emerge as they build evidence and draw increasing support. This is not true of climate denialism... and it is an "ism", a symptom of a political ideology and a thirst for power and control.

If the facts do not fit this political ideology, they resort to obfuscation, and endeavor to create their own specious counter "reality". All climate scientists are climate skeptics, and even a handful who doubt the veracity of global warming are probably true skeptics, but folk like this are simply marinated in odious (and odorous) denialism. They hate the word "denier", as it always resonates discordantly with the public. Lets use it at any and every possible venue!

Words do matter and we need to defend the lexicon!

with your derogatory use of the word "denier" in clear reference to those who deny AGW on the same level as holocaust deniers. That has been explicitly stated by AGW True Believers for years.

"polite people don't call us "deniers," Kevin"

Deniers is a naughty word, Kevin! Tsk, tsk.