Their Own Worst Enemies

Sorry Sharon, as an Atheist Libertarian I cannot get over the galling fact that condescending climate scientists have biased their findings by deleting or losing raw data, excluding scientists that disagree and publishing errors that always seem to promote a worst case scenario. They are not appealing to my intellect – they are trying to scare the hell out of me. Seeing how I am the one who is going to have to pay the bill to combat AGW, I want to make damn sure that I don’t smell a rat. By the way – please stop comparing AGW scepticism to creationism. Creationism in any form will not change my way of life or destroy the national economy.
Why scientists are losing the PR wars.
Scientists are lousy communicators. They appeal to people's heads, not their hearts or guts, argues Randy Olson, who left a professorship in marine biology to make science films. "Scientists think of themselves as guardians of truth," he says. "Once they have spewed it out, they feel the burden is on the audience to understand it" and agree.

That may work if the topic is something with no emotional content, such as how black holes form, but since climate change and how to address it make people feel threatened, that arrogance is a disaster. Yet just as smarter-than-thou condescension happens time after time in debates between evolutionary biologists and proponents of intelligent design (the latter almost always win), now it's happening with climate change. In his 2009 book, Don’t Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style, Olson recounts a 2007 debate where a scientist contending that global warming is a crisis said his opponents failed to argue in a way "that the people here will understand." His sophisticated, educated Manhattan audience groaned and, thoroughly insulted, voted that the "not a crisis" side won. Read more.