Note – I’m away for a couple of days, I doubt that I will have much opportunity to review and approve any new comments.
I came across Sourcewatch a little while ago.
If you were to also take a brief look at it’s global warming, climate change and climate skeptic section it will become quite clear what the contributors thoughts are about ‘climate skeptics’. After browsing for a while I then considered:
Who and what is the climate skeptic section intended for?
Perhaps it is there to reassure ‘climate change activists’, by publishing information about individual sceptics that are not terribly complimentary, or in my view economical with the full picture. Thus reassured the activist can depart and continue to state it is all down to an Exxon/Koch Brothers ‘anti science’ well funded climate denial machine.
Source Watch – Individual Skeptics
I might suggest stick around Source Watch a while longer, as a look at the list of individual sceptics led me to some interesting individuals websites that I was previously unaware of. Reading Sourcewatch can also give you an idea about the motivations and thought processes of the largely anonymous people that research and write there, perhaps allowing a sceptic or 2 to understand them better.
Perhaps it could alternatively be seen as a ‘skeptic role of honour’ ?
In much the same way as the ‘Campaign Against Climate Change’ probably has more ‘skeptics’ signed up to their ‘Skeptic Alerts’ email campaign than activists, where they now kindly email me daily a list of sceptical articles. Try embracing Sourcewatch as a jump off point for potentially interesting people’s websites and blogs….
You can then read these climate sceptics thoughts for yourself and judge them on the merits of their arguments and make up your own mind, something sadly I imagine many ‘climate change activists’ never do, just relying on the Sourcewatch review.
(Skeptics/sceptics seems to used interchangeably depending on US vs UK english spellings)