Article published in:
Environmental Argumentation
Edited by Marcin Lewiński and Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1] 2019
► pp. 4064
Bauman, Y.
2018, September 24. Taking fire from both sides [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://​standupeconomist​.com​/taking​-fire​-from​-both​-sides/
Boykoff, M.
2007Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006. Area, 39(2), 470–481. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M.
2004Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125–136. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ceccarelli, L.
2011Manufactured scientific controversy: Science, rhetoric, and public debate. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 14(2), 195–228. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collins, H., & Evans, R.
2002The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32(2), 235–296. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, I.
2019Deontic power and institutional contexts: The impact of institutional design on deliberation and decision-making in the UK fracking debate. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8(1), pp. 136–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gagarin, M.
2001Did the sophists aim to persuade? Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, 19(3), 275–291. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Glassman, M.
2015Stopping the spin cycle: ‘Merchants of Doubt’ debunks deceit. Documentary Magazine 2015(Winter).Google Scholar
Goodnight, G. T.
1982The personal, technical and public spheres of argument: A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 181, 214–227.Google Scholar
Goodwin, J.
2002Designing issues. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis (pp. 81–96). Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005Designing premises. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Argumentation in practice (pp. 99–114). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018Effective because ethical: Speech act theory as a framework for scientists’ communication. In S. Priest, J. Goodwin, & M. Dahlstrom (Eds.), Ethics and practice in science communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, J., & Honeycutt, L.
2009When science goes public: From technical arguments to appeals to authority. Studies in Communication Sciences, 9(2), 19–30.Google Scholar
Gore, D. C.
2011Sophists and sophistry in the Wealth of Nations . Philosophy and Rhetoric, 44(1), 1–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hamblin, C. L.
1993Fallacies. Newport News, VA: Vale Press.Google Scholar
Hawhee, D.
2002Agonism and arete. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 35(3), 185–207. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
2007Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Retrieved from http://​www​.ipcc​.ch​/report​/ar4​/syr/. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, S.
1998Disputation by design. Argumentation, 121, 183–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Design thinking in argumentation theory and practice. Argumentation, 29(3), 243–263. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, D., & Udell, W.
2003The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245–1260. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leff, M.
1986Textual criticism: The legacy of G. P. Mohrmann. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 72(4), 377–389. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lewiński, M., & Aakhus, M.
2014Argumentative polylogues in a dialectical framework: A methodological inquiry. Argumentation, 28(2), 161–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lewiński, M., & Mohammed, D.
2019The 2015 Paris Climate Conference: Arguing for the fragile consensus in global multilateral diplomacy. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 65–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Liberman, K.
2008Sophistry in and as its course. Argumentation, 22(1), 59–70. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maslin, M.
2004Global warming: A very short introduction. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, F. D.
2013Aristotle on belief and knowledge. In G. Anagnostopoulos & F. D. J. Miller (Eds.), (pp. 285–307). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
Musi, E. & Aakhus, M.
2019Framing fracking: Semantic frames as meta-argumentative indicators for knowledge-driven argument mining of controversies. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 112–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Morano, M.
2009Climate Depot’s TV Debate in Copenhagen: UK Warming Prof. falsely claims ‘5000 leading climate scientists’ in UN IPCC – Morano Counters: ‘You need to apologize and retract that immediately’. Retrieved from http://​www​.climatedepot​.com​/2009​/12​/12​/climate​-depots​-tv​-debate​-in​-copenhagen​-uk​-warming​-prof​-falsely​-claims​-5000​-leading​-climate​-scientists​-in​-un​-ipcc​-morano​-counters​-you​-need​-to​-apologize​-and​-retract​-that​-immediately/
Olivier, B.
2007Pseudo-communication and the return of the sophist: Thank you for smoking, at first sight. Communicatio, 33(2), 45–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Olson, R.
2010a#17) Interview with Marc Morano, Part I: “The Muhammad Ali of Global Warming ‘Debating’”. Retrieved from http://​thebenshi​.com​/?p​=557
2010b#18) Interview with Marc Morano, Part II: Naming Names (Bill McKibben, Exxon Mobil, George Monbiot, Al Gore, John Kerry, Joe Romm, Dan Weiss, Robert Murtha, Mike Mann, Ed Begley, Jr., Andy Revkin, and Ralph Cicerone). Retrieved from http://​thebenshi​.com​/?p​=608
2010c#19) Analysis: Why Marc Morano is such a good communicator. Retrieved from http://​thebenshi​.com​/?p​=664
Parsons, D.
2017Deconstructing a climate change skeptic: A podcast with Marc Morano. Retrieved from http://​americaadapts​.org​/2017​/08​/07​/deconstructing​-a​-climate​-skeptic​-the​-marc​-morano​-podcast/
Richardson, J. H.
2010This man wants to convince you global warming is a hoax. Esquire. Retrieved from https://​www​.esquire​.com​/news​-politics​/a7078​/marc​-morano​-0410/
Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S.
2010Comparing the argumentum model of topics to other contemporary approaches to argument schemes: The procedural and material components. Argumentation, 24(4), 489–512. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, S., Lewiński, M., & Uzelgun, M. A.
2019Environmental manifestoes: Argumentative strategies in the Ecomodernist Manifesto. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 12–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scott, E. C.
2004Confronting creationism. Reports of the National Council for Science Education, 24(6), 23.Google Scholar
Shulman, L. S.
1986Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1987Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Uzelgun, M. A., Lewiński, M., & Castro, P.
2016Favorite battlegrounds of climate action: Arguing about scientific consensus, representing science-society relations. Science Communication, 38(6) 699–723. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Laar, J. A.
2010Argumentative bluff in eristic discussion: An analysis and evaluation. Argumentation, 24(3), 383–398. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Laar, J. A., & Krabbe, E. C. W.
2019Criticism and justification of negotiated compromises: The 2015 Paris agreement in Dutch parliament. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 8(1), pp. 91–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vonnegut, K.
1961Harrison Bergeron. Retrieved from http://​www​.tnellen​.com​/cybereng​/harrison​.html
2009, December 12). Developing World Told to Make Sacrifices to Save the Planet [Video File]. Retrieved from https://​www​.youtube​.com​/watch​?v​=cgPJnvgCSb4
Whedbee, K. E.
2008Making the worse case appear the better: British reception of the Greek sophists prior to 1850. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 11(4), 603–630. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zarefsky, D.
2014Strategic maneuvering in political argumentation Rhetorical perspectives on argumentation: Selected essays by David Zarefsky (pp. 87–101): Springer International Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Ceyhan, Gaye D. & Deniz Saribas
2021. Research trends on climate communication in the post-truth era. Educational and Developmental Psychologist  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Goodwin, Jean
2019.  In Argumentation in Actual Practice [Argumentation in Context, 17],  pp. 157 ff. Crossref logo
Laar, Jan Albert van & Erik C. W. Krabbe
2019. Criticism and justification of negotiated compromises. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 91 ff. Crossref logo
Lewiński, Marcin & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
2019. Environmental argumentation. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Lewiński, Marcin & Dima Mohammed
2019. The 2015 Paris Climate Conference. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 65 ff. Crossref logo
Rodrigues, Soledade, Marcin Lewiński & Mehmet Ali Üzelgün
2019. Environmental manifestoes. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1  pp. 12 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.