164 Larian’s Terminology
Merry Christmas!
Media terminology matters when covering controversial science like climate change because it immediately frames the discussion. This concern was recently addressed in an open letter by the Center For Inquiry and signed by the likes of Lawrence Krauss, James Randi, Bill Nye, and a number of other academics (coverage by Salon, Forbes, National Journal).
“As scientific skeptics, we are well aware of political efforts to undermine climate science by those who deny reality but do not engage in scientific research or consider evidence that their deeply held opinions are wrong. The most appropriate word to describe the behavior of those individuals is “denial.” Not all individuals who call themselves climate change skeptics are deniers. But virtually all deniers have falsely branded themselves as skeptics. By perpetrating this misnomer, journalists have granted undeserved credibility to those who reject science and scientific inquiry.”
This comic is dedicated to long-time supporter Larian Laquella, at least that’s what he goes by online, a member of the Granite State Skeptics. I’ve known him for years since my first TAM, and every year he can be found there at the Del Mar lounge reading Cards Against Humanity punchlines at the top of his lungs for all to hear. He was one of many Kickstarter Backers and I’m happy to finally be getting through the personalized rewards.
I don't want to refer to ideologists as climate change skeptics, what else can I-
LARIAN
Climate change deniers.
ROB
That's a good one! But what about people who oppose evolution?
LARIAN
Primate change deniers.
ROB
-and people against vaccinations?
LARIAN
Germ exchange deniers.
0
0
0
0
Or maybe skeptics are “truth deniers”. Not referring to “truthers”regarding birth certificates. As Winston Churchill once stated,(paraphrased) “Truth is what it is and at the end of the day it is still true and doesn’t change no matter what opinions are used to express it.”
I’m confused, which skeptics and which “truth”?
It isn’t obvious? Truth if it is truth can never be false. Not a question of which truth. Science can never answer the question of “why?” it can only answer the question of “how?”.
For now!
Talk about a Quantum leap of faith!
Yes, but what one believes to be true, whether it’s in accordance with the majority opinion, with some wacko like Aristotle, or some wacko like Todd who lives in the alley and steals antifreeze to rub on his forehead to keep the aliens at bay, isn’t necessarily what IS true. It’s quite possible that literally nothing any human believes at this point in time. Insanely implausible, and I would never bet my own money on most aspects of modern science (or the scientific method itself) being wrong, but technically possible.
Primate Change Deniers is a wonderful phrase and I will find a way to work it into my conversations this week.
It’s obvious Archbishops change. Why deny it?
Another word that could be used in place of climate change/evolution/vaccination deniers is “infant.”
“Deniers” is the best word for them. They prefer to call themselves skeptics, but there’s a HUGE difference between skepticism (which can be swayed by evidence) and denial (which cannot).
Handy tip, taken from the Nye/Ham debate: Ask them what would convince them to change their minds. If they say “Nothing,” they’re denialists.