– “On conspiracy theory. It’s a term often used by MSM and politicians to deride people and obscure truth.”
Yes, this is true; many terms are abused this way, eg. “hacker” to mean criminal, “Anti-Semitism” to discredit those who criticise Israel. Abuse of such terms is a major aspect of propaganda. But there is such a thing as conspiracy theory, and it has a recognisable structure. I haven’t come up with a definition, but I can describe it, and common behaviours of its adherents: see my comment November 13, 2020 at 02:38 and the one that follows it, and the comment that shows where Yeadon invoked conspiracy theory to popularise his pseudo-scientific assertions because he knew they’d be rigorously refuted in any scientific forum – start from the link and follow my argument down the page.
ET and SA, you both treated Yeadon’s arguments as if they were science. They are conspiracy theory disguised as science, intended to trash science and raise suspicion of both the scientific process and the scientific community. You really do the public a disservice by treating them seriously at all.
People have little difficulty recognising political or religious arguments, but they don’t recognise conspiracy theory, and they need to.
Anyway, my heart isn’t in this; I feel too negative. Humanity probably has no future, because human ingenuity at ignoring and denying facts will ensure that we will damage the biosphere so much that civilisation will collapse. So why should I even bother?