Over at the Point of Inquiry forums, a commenter named citizenschallenge has done something very, very useful. He (or she) has basically listed all the different parts of my interview with Naomi Oreskes--idiosyncratically, at points, but nevertheless pretty comprehensively and also at times memorably.
So I think I'll repost; it is not often that one has such a handy roadmap:
7:00 Naomi explains why she doesn’t like the term “manufacturing doubt” since doubt is actually an integral part of science.
7:50 Strategy for delaying legislative action & legislation
9:10 Chris: “How do we know historically that these tactics are without precedent…?” Defending claim that 1953 ushered in an entirely new era in attacking science:
10:10 Interesting phenomena fighting the evidence though you appreciate it is correct.
13:00 The balance between what we know & what we don’t know.
Getting to the point were we can say that “This knowledge is secure, this knowledge is robust, It is based on tremendous amounts of evidence that add up to a consistent picture and that it is rational and appropriate to move forward and take action on the basis of that knowledge.”
14:15 Strategy of undermining people’s small errors
15:00 The challenge is to tell ...<\/p>
Over at the Point of Inquiry forums, a commenter named citizenschallenge has done something very, very useful. He (or she) has basically listed all the different parts of my interview with Naomi Oreskes--idiosyncratically, at points, but nevertheless pretty comprehensively and … Continue reading <\/a>
<\/a><\/p>
<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"