How You Know You Are Winning An Argument

One thing I have learned from a number of years of being a vocal climate skeptic on the web:  When group A makes an argument, and group B responds only with ad hominem attacks on motivations and funding sources, then group A is winning.  It may not seem that way in the media, mainly because the media has gotten to the point where they accept ad hominem attacks as valid rebuttals to scientific or policy arguments.

Remember that charges of faulty motivations, being funded by evil scheming organizations, or even of racism are effectively admissions of weakness.  People who make such arguments are basically admitting that they cannot argue the issue on its merits, and so must resort to tarring the other side so that they can say the people raising the issue don't deserve a response.


  1. Artemis:

    Well said

  2. Rick:

    If only voters saw it the same way.

  3. Mesa Econoguy:

    I no longer give a flying fuck what other people think, especially flagrantly ignorant leftish assholes (redundant).