Re: Brin: Arguing Doesn't Work: Fact Vs Belief

On Nov 15, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Matthew Bos wrote:

>>> New research suggests that misinformed people rarely change
>>> their minds when presented with the facts ? and often become
>>> even more attached to their beliefs. The finding raises
>>> questions about a key principle of a strong democracy: that a
>>> well-informed electorate is best.
>>
>> This is why it is futile to argue with religionists.
>
> WTG wrote:
>
>> That is obvious.  Anyone who professes a belief in something
>> unprovable (or provably false) is a denialist.
>
> In light of this, what should we call people who do not have belief in
> C02 based global warming?

Doesn't that depend on why they "do not have belief"? If they could
cite evidence that CO2-based global warming is not happening, or
that (beyond anything like the specious "it's just a theory, after
all" smoke screen favored by Intelligent Design fans) there is
contrary data that puts it in question, then we'd call them
something other than mere denialists.

Dave