More on BBC's "Contrarian Top 10"

Recently we linked to the BBC's table of climate skeptic arguments and succinct responses. Real Climate also had a comment on the piece -- a tart one at that:... So why do the contrarians still use arguments that are blatantly false? I think the most obvious reason is that they are simply not interested (as a whole) in providing a coherent counter story. If science has one overriding principle, it is that you should adjust your thinking in the light of new information and discoveries - the contrarians continued use of old, tired and discredited arguments demonstrates their divorce from the scientific process more clearly than any densely argued rebuttal.