http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/11/who-do-you-love.html Challenging Climate Orthodoxy Wed, 08 Sep 2010 13:45:48 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/11/who-do-you-love.html/comment-page-1#comment-810 geoff chambers Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:02:32 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=239#comment-810 The lively discussion you link to is on Revkin’s blog on the New York Times site. Like the discussions set up between Lomborg and others in the Guardian, it’s intelligent and well-informed, but its purpose seems to be to keep alive the illusion of controversy in the liberal media, while avoiding the only question of importance -whether or not dangerous anthropogenic global warming is occuring, or can be confidently predicted in the near to medium-term future. The underlying message ofthe BBC article and the NYT blog seems to be: “Look, we’re not blinkered, we’re willing to have a lively discussion about climate change, really we are”. Does it suggest that someone in these organisations has the glimmering of a guilty conscience about the stifling of genuine debate? The lively discussion you link to is on Revkin’s blog on the New York Times site. Like the discussions set up between Lomborg and others in the Guardian, it’s intelligent and well-informed, but its purpose seems to be to keep alive the illusion of controversy in the liberal media, while avoiding the only question of importance -whether or not dangerous anthropogenic global warming is occuring, or can be confidently predicted in the near to medium-term future.
The underlying message ofthe BBC article and the NYT blog seems to be: “Look, we’re not blinkered, we’re willing to have a lively discussion about climate change, really we are”. Does it suggest that someone in these organisations has the glimmering of a guilty conscience about the stifling of genuine debate?

]]>