True Pundit

Science

Leading Climate Scientist Says Debating Scientific Theories Would Be ‘Un-American’

FOLLOW US!
Follow on FacebookFollow on Twitter

(The Federalist) Many scientists are now rejecting an open debate on anthropogenic global warming. EPA administrator Scott Pruitt appears ready to move forward with a “red-team, blue-team” exercise, where two groups of scientists publicly challenge each other’s evidence on manmade climate change. The idea was floated during a Congressional hearing last spring and outlined in a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Steve Koonin, former undersecretary of energy in the Obama administration. Koonin said the public is unaware of the intense debate in climate science and how “consensus statements necessarily conceal judgment calls and debates and so feed the “settled,” “hoax” and “don’t know” memes that plague the political dialogue around climate change.”

Then there is the interminably-petulant and prosaic Michael Mann, who routinely dishes out the “denier” name to anyone who crosses him, and recently compared himself to a Holocaust survivor. Mann told ThinkProgress that the red-team concept is “un-American” and a ruse to “run a pro-fossil fuel industry disinformation campaign aimed at confusing the public and policymakers over what is potentially the greatest threat we face as a civilization.” – READ MORE

READ MORE: 

FOLLOW US!
Follow on FacebookFollow on Twitter

  • David Pickles

    When I was growing up in the 1970’s all we ever heard from the climate scientists of the time was that we were going into another ice age, fast forward 40 odd years and it’s now global warming. Just over 10 years ago Al Gore beat us over the head with An inconvenient truth, why isn’t Florida under water already, did any of his predictions come true? The polar ice cap is melting, yes, but the Antarctica ice is growing thicker, which sounds pretty much like Newton’s third law of motion in action to me. I hope these scientists do get together and thrash out the actual truth, rather than hyperbole, and relying on amended sometimes dubious or outright falsified data.