“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

Hamlet, by W.M. Shakespeare

A little modesty is in order, I think.

And I’ll further thank you to refrain from telling me what my philosophy of life is. It was, I thought, a thoroughly right wing notion that adults could determine how and why to live their life. It’s also my absolute right to decline to discuss the matter with you. Your opinion is of no import to me and your conclusions are so faulty as to not even be wrong.

I guess I’m asking how you convince someone who isn’t equipped to properly evaluate claims that they’re not properly equipped to evaluate claims. Which is obviously an uphill slog, to say the least

Indeed it is!

The only tack I have found to be successful is only available when the AGW “Skeptic” claims that natural cycles or occurrences are responsible for the current warming trend. In this case, one can poiont out that the climate scientists have already thought of that (duh!) and have looked into it, and have found that natural phenomena cannot account for either the warming we see or the increase in atmospheric CO2 and methane. I guess also, there are a whole slew of GHGs that are wholly artificial (pretty much all of the CFCs are also GHGs).

Even though that WILL get you the right answer on a scientific issue 99.9 percent of the time, it’s still not an argument based directly on the soundness (or lack thereof) of the “skeptic’s” standard of evidence. I think you’re right that there’s no easy razor you can apply to all situations; the Potter Stewart Porn Principle arguably applies here (“I’ll know it when I see it”): as you say, on a case-by-case basis.

Yes, the definitions of sceptic and persuasive evidence that I have used for convenience do indeed look like a circular argument.

My word, it’s a semantic (and metaphorical) minefield!

@33 Cafeenman – Have you paid attention to how much NASA’s budget has been cut the last few years? Science, and especially space science, are not looked at as anything close to a priority by this administration and they have cut huge amounts from the budget, ending important programs. It has been blogged about here a time or two. Obama ain’t all bad, but on this he most certainly is. Hopefully come 2016 some one will get elected that is better on the issue.

Wait a sec, I thought it was Congress that decided NASA’s budget, not the President.

The fact remains: Obama elected, 300-plus-point drop.
If you have any other explanation as to why markets dropped THAT DAY, I’d love to hear it.

No, you wouldn’t. Timothy from Boulder gave you a very reasonable and different explanation that you chose to ignore, so spare us the load of crap that you’re all ears.

…and who didn’t even write his own book…

More awful CRAP. Since Romney just got TORCHED, I mean, SOUNDLY THRASHED—there are convicted felons who could muster more electoral votes—dontchya think it’s a wee bit late in the game for the lying smear routine? How many months of campaigning was there to get all this weak, hopeless nonsense in? Hmmm? No one was listening then, and it’s gonna do even LESS good now, in case you haven’t noticed. Here’s a radical idea: maybe try the truth for once, and see where that gets you.

Also, get this, Radwaste, Obama actually reads books, unlike a certain self-styled “decider” who nearly destroyed our country.

If you support this man, do the same things you would do to support Mr. Bush when he was in office. Lead with the actual actions this President has taken to make things better. Be sure to count the costs.

Come see us in four years. If the nation is about to THOROUGHLY TANK like in 2008 after 8 years of Bush’s retrograde devastation, then you can blah-blah us to death with your smug lectures. Till then, save your lukewarm bluster for the obstructionist GOP-dominated House, kthxbai.

…and who has actually stated in public that business owners did not build their business…

Wow, like many conservatives you like to praise virtues – in this case honesty – more than you like to practice them. Obama flat out never said that or anything that could be honestly interpreted to mean that. And I would be surprised to find out you didn’t know that when you posted your comment.

Find me the quote where Obama said that above. “You didn’t build that” was saying that business owners didn’t build the Eisenhower Interstate System upon which their businesses rely and he was right. We have socialized roads and they greatly benefit the American economy.

It also makes sense. Why would anyone think a person with zero business experience, and who has actually stated in public that business owners did not build their business, and whose community organizations have failed…
…and who didn’t even write his own book… would be good for business?

If you support this man, do the same things you would do to support Mr. Bush when he was in office. Lead with the actual actions this President has taken to make things better. Be sure to count the costs.