Are AGW zealots mind readers?

Question

Most questions about AGW gainsayers, are asked to the zealots, or they ask the deniers and then choose a zealot answer. How do zealots know what deniers know and how deniers think if they don't read thier answers. Are the AGW zealots so arrogant that they believe they actually know how and why other people come to their conclusions. How do they do it because I want to read minds too.

Answer 1

Not much of a jury pool...is it?

Answer 2

This is a typical attack phrased as a question against someone that disagrees with your opinion.

In short your question translates:

If you disagree with me and my prejudices you are:

A.) stupid

B.) evil

C.) in the pay of big business

D.) racist

E.) all of the above.

Answer 3

Can you give an example? When I chose a best answer, I try to select one that is well sourced, or is supported by known science.

Anyhow, most of responses on Yahoo! Answers are completely predictable:

“Global Warming is caused by the sun.” – Not... Please provide a source other than the Heartland Institute.

“Global Warming has happened in the past. It’s all just a natural cycle.” – Would you agree that forest fires can only have natural causes (lightning strikes) and that careless campers and arsonists are physically unable to ignite a forest fire?

“Al Gore is a big fat idiot.” – OK?!? But how about our understanding of physics.

“But global warming ended in 1998.” – Ummm, CO2 forcings are not the only thing that can affect climate.

“It’s snowing outside. Where is your global warming now?” -- Global warming is a global phenomenon; what happens in your backyard perhaps is interesting to you, but may not be relevant to the globe. And anyhow, winter comes every year.

Answer 4

They are omniscient and omnipresent...... but, thankfully, not very omnipotent.

Answer 5

Ah yes but to take an example from the other side I have seen that it is all a plot against America.  Not only reading minds but also a conspiracy.  Oh I know the oil companies pay some deniers (some supporting evidence for this) but it is more a scatter gun approach than a conspiracy as the deniers say different and often contradictory things.  But to answer you question both sides do a little mind reading.

There is also the problem of people who ask questions such as "Global warming is c**p?" or similar.  It is very clear the type of answer such a person will chose.  Us zealots have to keep our end up and give a fair share of best answers to those who patiently and repeatedly explain the true situation.