A new comment on the post "The RICO 20: lessons in stupidity" is waiting for your approval
http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2016/05/15/the-rico-20-lessons-in-stupidity/ (update: nowadays you may prefer https://wmconnolley.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/the-rico-20-lessons-in-stupidity/)
Author: Brad KeyesComment:Dr Connolley writes inline that:<blockquote>[...The antithesis of science is denialism, e.g. WUWT or Republican congresscritters -W]</blockquote>Um, not quite.Denialism is the opposite of <i>believalism</i>.Republican congresscritters is the opposite of <i>Democrat senatecritters</i>.The opposite of science is <i>antiscience</i>: the active hostility to human discovery about nature. This hostility is exemplified when a supposed "scientist" says that if people he doesn't like ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, he'd rather destroy a priceless library of knowledge about climate and weather rather than send to anyone.
A new comment on the post "The RICO 20: lessons in stupidity" http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2016/05/15/the-rico-20-lessons-in-stupidity/Author: Tom CComment:
William has steered this discussion onto the question of "is it illegal?" That could be true or not, but it is irrelevant. The point is that skeptics are constantly being accused of representing the interest of big oil in order to line their pockets. We are offered examples that are usually a few thousand dollars or so - typical consulting fees for a couple days work. Here is a professor that has an institute with some vague purpose, with a name containing the high-minded words "global", "environment" and "society", staffed by his family and friends. He gets $ 5.6 MM of government climate money to do, well, whatever it is that he does [can someone tell me what we got for this investment?]. This might be all legal, but it is still a scandal.
