[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
But my challenge still stands. What Ph.D. level skeptic on this forum have I ignored their arguments?


[/ QUOTE ]

Where did I claim you did?

[/ QUOTE ]

Earlier in this thread you said:

[ QUOTE ]
It's exactly the tactic you use when you accuse someone of being an oil company tool. Instead of actually addressing the arguments and points someone makes, you disparage the person instead. It shows a distinct lack of intellectual honesty.

[/ QUOTE ]

You clearly accused me using ad hominem exclusively and ignoring the science.

[ QUOTE ]
My claim is that accusing someone of being a tool for an oil company doesn't contribute any useful information to the debates and amounts to nothing more than a smear. ... Instead of dismissing someone as an oil company tool just say you've shown the points to be invalid before in other posts. FWIW those tactics detract from your points.

[/ QUOTE ]

The climate critic world (a neutral term :-D) is FULL of Ph.D's on the oil payroll routinely messing up highschool level science. Many of these people have a history of defending tobacco or industrial pollutants. Sorry, but this industry is well documented via leaked internal memos and needs to be exposed. Like I said before I merely point out trends.

[ QUOTE ]
On your stuff on oil companies, I don't think this is anywhere close to proving your apparent claim that oil companies are deliberately spreading disinformation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well then what burden of proof will convince you?

[ QUOTE ]
A question for you is it all possible that disinfiormation is being used to promote agendas?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I understand this question but there are shills on all sides of the debate.