I saw this comment elsewhere and heartily agree -

"Honestly, I am just stunned at the collective complete and utter ignorance of such a seemingly vast swathe of the population here in Oz. Apparently science is a political construct and meaningless in terms of its research, observations and achievement?

You honestly believe this is a rort by science looking for funding, as opposed to a real problem that the big fossil fuel based businesses and all their related vested interests are intent on sweeping under the carpet in order to protect themselves?"

The term is not sceptic - it's denialist.
Denialist -
"a person who refuses to admit the truth of a concept or proposition that is supported by the majority of scientific or historical evidence" or "the refusal to accept an empirically verifiable reality".

rache, how rash of you to label anyone not taken in by the climate change religion, or it's predecessor global warming (until the warming part was discredited), as 'denialist'.
Does that mean that the opposite of 'denialist' is 'someone of blind faith' or 'naive'? Certainly, I see believers in that vein as the vast majority of scientists (atmospheric scientists included), do not believe in man-made global warming, climate change or whatever the next convenient label for the non-phenomenon will be.

Remember Climategate!

Dear rache,

May I suggest two approaches to your post; the first is to refute the basis for your post, which I will do. The second would be to describe in sociological terms, what has happened to your adopted reasoning. Refuting the basis for your post may well be understood by you. The second part, the socialization of science will not be understood by you because if you did understand it, you would not have written what you did in the first place.

Firstly, to your assertions and descriptions of “denialists”. You suggest that there are those who regard “the science as a political construct and meaningless in terms of its research, observations and achievement?”

Correct. The instant science is politicized it is corrupted, hence the expression socialization of science, it is a political construct. Next you address the attributes of “research, observations and achievement”. In the case of this phenomenon the research is invalidated, the observations are non-empirical and the achievements are non-existent. (Except for the political achievements).

You accuse those who do not support your position as “denialists”, who refuse to accept “empirically verifiable reality". Now you have the problem of trying to explain why there is no empirical evidence, therefore no verifiable science and a complete absence of reality. You do of course; have all the time and space you could wish for to provide answers to these questions for your fellow OLO’ers. However, since these questions have been put to the warmertariat endlessly with no meaningful response, I’m afraid you have little hope, but we are listening.

In the end you are just repeating the warmertariat mantra without any understanding; you are just gullible.

The socialization of science undermines itself, if scientific discourse has nothing to do with reality, why does streptomycin cure TB and not magic

If that is the type of rubbish The age contains, then it is no wonder their sales are down.

I do wonder how many people would connect to Anthonys website to read his ramblings.

Most people are AGW sceptics simply because they are practical people who will only accept solid evidence on issues, not some religous driven tripe.

Alternatively, the possible explanations for alarmists and AGW believer's lack of reasoning is egotism, vanity, arrogance and elitism, projection of a desire to avoid their own personal demise into saving the world, religious substitution, cognitive dissonance, misanthropy and plain old stupidity.

Most obvious though, is a complete inability of AGW acolytes to consider and admit defects in AGW theory; and since the theory is a pack of lies, the inevitable resort to condescension, insult, threats and other bully-boy tactics when the lie is pointed out to them.

It should also be noted that the AGW 'theory' is almost identical to the Eden myth; that is, a perfect world with man living in harmony with nature/god until man 'eats from the fruit of knowledge/starts using fossil fuel' and is cast from this idyllic paradise into a nature disrupted hell-hole.

Whatever, AGW is agnotological.

there have been some massive falures in the green scam

dwtv...just spoke of the clever bying up outside germany..onselling in germany..plus collecting the credits back in cash

only 300 million..there
next they went to a collapse..solum..BANKRUPT
how much govt cash into them

not as much as went to that solar water heating tube mob in usa[solandra?]..that got billions..really billions..of govt bailouts
built a factory and went broke

green jobs boys
lol

a sukker born every second
enough guilt blame to go arround
please guys keep up...spain went huge on green jobs
now 25%..unemployment..and a bucket load of debt!

oh lord why so many follower's
willing to follow..any feel good scam?