7) Define the Debate, A to Z
A Constructive Argument based on real facts, with the ultimate goal being a collective better understanding of the issue at hand.
Such as a Scientific Debate where honestly representing your opponent’s position is required. Striving to understand your opponent’s position well enough to reject or modify it on the merits of your own facts.
If we fail, it means something. It may hurt, but it’s a learning experience for the intellectually honest. Mistakes have always been necessary learning opportunities for the stout.
Z Lawyerly Debate, winning is all that matters, facts are irrelevant obstacles to hurdle. Being skilled in rhetorical trickery is a prerequisite. Objective learning is not the object.
Amorality, misdirection and theatre are its hallmarks.
8) Intellectual Confrontation
The fact is, climate science awareness is being actively stifled by ruthless individuals with bottomless bank accounts and octopus news outlets to do their bidding. They have sold a lazy public a pack of lies that have become the comfort zone of all too many today.
How can the misinformation this juggernaut force feeds the public be neutralized without direct intellectual confrontation by masses of informed, concerned, engaged students, and citizens, everywhere it pops up?
It’s not about attacking people, it’s about attacking the maliciously deceptive words, the lies and stupidity they spew. It’s about teaching them how our physical planet operates!
A good resource for factual jump starts:
Focus. Expose the dishonesty in their words and educate them.
9) Call out False Claims & Lies
When someone makes a malicious false claim, relentlessly demand evidence for said attacks - shame and expose those who refuse to produce evidence for their malicious claims. Examine and expose the props substituted for substance.
Dissect and confront their tactics rather than being played by them!
10) Better than Skepticism ===> Critical Thinking Skills
The term “Skeptics” has been poisoned by theatre and the grotesque double standard of the GOP.
Critical Thinking Skills is a clear descriptive that explains the process itself.
11) Confront Trash Talk with Rhetorical Jujutsu
Contrarians depend on personal attacks to distract the discussion from their bankrupt “science”. Learn to recognize the game, turn it to your favor, be prepared to point out the juvenility of the tactic, while forcing the discussion back to the real world facts your contrarian opponent won’t have.
fyi, studies in the contrarian mindscape:
LandscapesAndCycles, Jim Steele’s malicious deception.
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/p/landscapesandcycles.html ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
A contrarian shouts: “Science, science, science.”
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/19555/#235817 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
google “Jujutsu” ~ Food for Thought, turn the conversation into an exploration of the tactics of avoidance, evasion and lying.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Where appropriate, why not point out Calumny in action?
Be ready to define it: https://dictionary.thelaw.com/calumny/
12) Faith-based Thinking - consider the source
Possessing the hubris to fancy that we petty, jealous, fearful, prideful humans can access and understand the real God of Light and Time, Life and Love, leads to a profound disconnect from our planet’s physical reality, and an immoral absolutism.
It’s one thing to believe in an unknowable god, quite another to mistake one’s own hyper-inflated EGO for God. Unhinged from reality is not too harsh a descriptive.