Why hasn’t there been a real debate on climate science?

Engaging in and losing any meaningful public debate, would only hasten that process. It is only by rigidly enforcing conformity to the consensus and refusing to engage in any debate, that the big lie can stay safely hidden.

Pointman's

Given that the alarming scenarios predicted by climate science are being used as the reason for advocating massive changes in society, prosperity, industrial infrastructure, lifestyles and even democracy, there’s never been a real debate over its veracity. You have alarmists on one side, who have near total control of most mediums of communication and who refuse to engage with skeptics in any meaningful way, and on the other, a volunteer militia of skeptics.

The only real airing of the issues is happening on the internet, simply because the skeptics had no other outlet medium, so they moved out early to it.  This very definitely gave them first mover advantage, but though in response the climate alarmists created a number of very well-funded sites to push their message, their hit rates have been dropping like stones since the heady days of Copenhagen euphoria. However, though the science is being discussed by each party amongst…

View original post 1,510 more words

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Science, Securing Liberty. Bookmark the permalink.