195 Leah Ceccarelli is Associate Professor of Communication at University of Washington–Seattle. She would like to thank her writing group, Barbara Schneider and Jen Bacon, for their encourage- ment and support, and Martin J. Medhurst for his editorial guidance. © 2011 Michigan State University Board of Trustees. All rights reserved. Rhetoric & Public Affairs Vol. 14, No. 2, 2011, pp. 195–228. ISSN 1094-8392. Manufactured Scientific Controversy: Science, Rhetoric, and Public Debate Leah Ceccarelli his article examines three cases that have been identiied by scholars as “manufactured” scienti ic controversies, in which rhetors seek to promote or delay public policy by announcing that there is an ongoing scientiic debate about a matter for which there is actually an overwhelming scientiic consensus. he comparative study of argumentative dynamics in the cases of AIDS dissent, global warming skepticism, and intelligent design reveals the deployment of rhetorical traps that take advantage of balancing norms and appeals to democratic values. It also reveals the inefectual counterarguments marshalled by defenders of mainstream science. By exploring the inventional possibilities available to those who would respond to manufactured scientiic controversies, this article equips readers and their students to confute deceptive arguments about science and engage in a more productive public debate. In so doing, this article initiates an Isocratean orientation to the rhetoric of science as a ield of study. S oon ater habo Mbeki became president of South Africa in 1999, he formed a Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel that included a number of people who claimed that an ongoing scientiic controversy existed about whether the human immunodeiciency virus (HIV) causes acquired immune deiciency syndrome (AIDS). Simultaneously, Mbeki prohibited government hospitals from distributing antiretroviral (ARV) drugs to those who were infected with HIV. 1 Prior to elections in 2003, a popular movement forced