The Truth is Out There

That was the tagline to this popular 1990s sci-fi TV show.

And so that is my advice to birthers, anti-vaxxers, 9/11 Truthers, Watts/Morano dwellers, Anna Haynes soul travelers, New Agers, UFO abductees, Holocaust deniers, flat-earthers, New World Order fretters, and Scientologists ( I gotta cap the list somewhere).

The truth is out there. Keep looking. You’ll find it.

11 Responses to “The Truth is Out There”

  1. Hannah says:

    Keith, suggestion for tomorrow morning: Having slept on the “The Truth is Out There” post ““ which is *extremely* simple ““ I woke up this morning having 2nd thoughts about the appropriateness of mentioning someone (Anna Haynes) at this level, and logged in just now, intending to take it down.
     

  2. Keith Kloor says:

    Hannah,
    See this comment by Anna at CP, and this one from Tom Yulsman (comment # 104. She’s may have taken down her SourceWatch page out of public embarrassment, but she’s still on a fishing expedition.

  3. intrepid_wanders says:

    Keith, don’t forget the “Double Dividend Hypothesis” believers 😉

  4. “AGW deniers” should be on there — it covers the Watts/Morano sub-tribe too.
     
     
     

  5. Gaythia says:

    Can we bring up cruise ships again?
    The truth is out there:
    http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/vwd/wastewaterfactsheet.cfm
    But EPA investigative funding may be canceled.

  6. Andy says:

    As a Pastafarian, I demand to be included on your list!  We all know that AGW is linked to piracy!

  7. Hannah says:

    Keith, yes, it did come across as a fishing expedition. I am an employment lawyer, working in London, and in UK we got something called discrimination questionnaires. Basically in preparation for a court case you can, as a claimant, send out questionnaires to the respondent asking all sorts of questions, hoping that you will get an answer which will support your case. The beauty, for the claimant, is that it is almost impossible to give an answer to these that will actually improve your situation as a respondent. In best case you will have spent a lot of time and energy  maintaining status quo and in worst case you will have said something really stupid that will later be used against you (I recently had somebody merrily confess to having discussed what the hell to do with a pregnant employee who was then dismissed) now if you do not answer these questions the court can make an “inference” so you will normally try to navigate the shark infested waters here but any sane person receiving a questionnaire from Anna Haynes would surely be better off ignoring it? It is very difficult to see what could possibly be gained by answering it. She was just trying to find evidence to support her “case”. Muller says, and I reckon he is right: “They want you to be either a warmist or a skeptic or something like that. And that tends to make the argument sound like it’s a case of law in which you have lawyers arguing both sides”. I also found his point about trust very interesting:”And because they don’t trust the public, in the end the public doesn’t trust them”. There is NOTHING worse than a client that for whatever reason do not trust you from the outset because once you realize that they are withholding information for you the trust has gone and you keep expecting something that will totally undermine your case to turn up.
     

  8. Jeff Norris says:

    Keith
    The truth is out there about Judith Curry, so you might want  to easy up on Anna.  Otherwise your misogynistic views and the homoerotic nature of commenter’s will be exposed or maybe not.  I am not saying  Climate change is a race, gender, class and generational issue but maybe I am.  

    http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2011/04/13/science-spice-etc/

  9. Keith Kloor says:

    The funny thing about Martha is that I really like how she goes to to toe with the more wild-eyed denizens at Climate Etc. (That is her, right?) I also think it’s notable that she’s a woman participating in a forum that is dominated by men.

    I happen to be the mushy Alan Alda type of guy who is not following in the footsteps of my sexist forebears, who were Archie Bunker types. So notwithstanding my differences with Anna, I wish there were more women engaging in this fractious debate. I don’t even mind Anna’s zeal. I just wish she wasn’t totally blinded by it in a way that makes her believe that someone like me is an enemy to her cause.

  10. Menth says:

    That “greenfyre” blog is hilarious, I drift by there every so often for kicks. My favourite is how he replaces any comment he disagrees with an avalanche of his own snark. It usually looks like this:
     
    -SNIP-
    “Obviously you are too stupid to construct a logical argument and your infantile denialist blubbering is akin to the sound of an elephant farting. As much as it is impressive that an idiotic mongoloid like you could somehow type into a keyboard, any further comments will be placed in the spam thread.”
     
     
     

  11. Hannah says:

    Jeff, “Otherwise your misogynistic views and the homoerotic nature of commenter’s will be exposed or maybe not.” Eh, as it happens I am a reasonably young woman, working for a non-profit organisation representing people who has been discriminated against by way of race, gender or sexuality”¦”¦”¦:o)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.