>>1015972It's really very simple: anyone that questions global warming is labeled a "climate change denier". The problem with this label is:
- Strawman fallacy: global warming skeptics ALSO believe the climate is changing, of course they do. What they question is mankind's influence on climate change: positive, negative, negligible? This label is a deliberate attempt to mislabel dissenting viewpoints as absurd.
- Pejorative term: the term "denier" carries connotations of dishonesty, refusal to acknowledge the truth, and evasiveness. Ex. a born again christian once called me a "Christ denier." If global warming "zealots" (see I did it too) were interested in a fair discussion, they would label opponents "climate change dissenters", which carries connotations of the Western tradition of honoring and protecting different viewpoints... ie "dissenting" supreme court justice positions.
I don't know much about climate change science, and I honestly don't have a vested interest in the debate either way.
What I do know is, using the term "climate change denier", an immediate strawman with a pejorative, reminds me of a boxing match, where at the starting bell one boxer throws sand in the other guy's face and puts brass knuckles in his gloves. I don't know if the other guy (the victim) is an honest fighter, he might fight dirty too...but the dirty fighter is *for sure* not a good guy, that's not what good guys do.
tldr; climate change activists fight dirty, they shouldn't be trusted
