Are we really surrounded by global warming (aka climate change) deniers? There is no scientific controversy about this. As with evolution, whether you believe it or not, it's still true. Or is the layman's understanding of the evidence only based on the random political, religious, national and other affiliations?
We are surrounded by people whose livelihoods are 100% based on scientific theory (aka the theory of flight - or is it god holding up the planes? Prove it isn't!) who do not understand and/or refute the evolving conclusions from scientific observations and experimentation, such as the greenhouse effect, ice core data, etc.? It's all just, "Wrong! Wrong...wrong..." based on preferred spin and junk science as promoted by lobbyists?
Will biofuel actually accomplish anything positive for the world or for CX? To be determined, kind of like the CMP, huh?
As for the little gem of a tangent - come on, man...really, still, in 2017? Amongst relatively educated and informed colleagues, too? Ugh. Besides the general red herrings:
Knives kill people too...
"Anecdotal" logical fallacy: using examples to extrapolate without a statistically significant number of cases that could form scientifically compelling evidence, e.g. knives are lethal in the right hands, but they can only kill one person at a time and have no ability to kill at a distance.
Maybe we should all just stay home indefinitely...
"Slippery slope" logical fallacy: If we let A happen, then B through to Z will consequently happen too, therefore A should not happen. In combination with the "nanny state" assertion, it's an "appeal to emotion" logical fallacy: manipulation of emotions rather than the use of valid reasoning.
Etc. - but I know it would take days of deprogramming to sort out even just one entrenched person.
