Recently in Criticism Category

Humans shall persist and thrive - Pro or Con?

| 2 Comments | 0 TrackBacks
Crazy is doing the same thing over-and-over and expecting a different result.   

Climatedebatedaily.com continues crazy postings trying to establish and prop up a false debate - promoting doubt about global warming.  More accurately their own words claim they are debating "Calls to Action" or "Dissenting Voices "  (inaction).  But that is not the debate I read there.

Their headings actually are saying "Do we act or not?"   And I can see a reasonable discussion on that question.   But looking at the content on each side, they are not really debating what they claim.  Their global warming postings seem to be divided between new science discoveries versus the magical thinking of global warming denialists.  Science verses religion is an old, tired debate.

suncloudss.jpgThey seem to want to divert and delude us from facing the real issue: human extinction.  Do we want to accept it?   Maybe they can re-label their standings as a debate like:  Pro-extinction and Con-extinction

It is crazy continuing to criticize climatedebatedaily.com.  They will
never change.  So I am expanding my messaging beyond theirs.  It is time to ponder the real issue:  "Humans shall persist and thrive - Pro or Con" 

They can frame the debate through the selection of materials they choose to post.  "... of what ultimately goes onto the page, the editors' decisions are final."

So when I ask them (ClimateDebateDaily.com) to step up and start talking about the real issue - I know that is a crazy request.

Are we a crazy species?   That's still another debate.

Criticisms of Climate Debate Daily . com

| 0 TrackBacks

Climate Debate Daily: A new way to understand disputes about global warming. A more accurate tag would be “the same old ways of garbling disputes about global warming.”


http://carbon-based-ghg.blogspot.com/2008/01/climate-debate-daily-gives-megaphone-to.html

Climate Debate Daily is a website which claims to offer “a new way to understand disputes about global warming”:
http://ianramjohn.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/climate-debate-daily/

A quick search on Google turns up quite a few links to this site. Most simply document its existence, or broadly fall for its spin. A few sites call it for what it is - a website playing the Fox News game of deception “we report, you decide”. And then there’s a wealth of libertarian/Objectivist sites which, unsurprisingly, are almost giddy over the site. Perhaps that the most telling bit - the people who are praising the site are all “skeptics”. No one pro-science seems to have anything positive to say about the site. Only the “skeptics”. Curious, isn’t it?