This is the reason why the recent Harris poll discovered that 40% of those polled believe that the human component of "global warming" is substantial. Last year it was 50%. Why the sudden change? This greenie admission tells it all. There is a growing army of intellectually gifted human beings who refuse to swallow the conventional wisdom. These people have studied the science and they are ready to debate. They are unknown outside of the world of blogs where they present their views effectively. Politicians can ignore them at their peril. Consider the source of this admission.
An environment blog, focused on behavioral solutions to global warming.
It’s hard to believe a green advocate would make this admission:
From highly respected fellow blogger, Mark Seal, here is a thought provoking post on why we greenies may need to sharpen our debating skills . . .
When I launched the TalkClimateChange forums last year, I was initially worried as to where I would find people who didn’t believe in global warming. I had planned to create a furious debate, but in my experience global warming was such a universally accepted issue that I expected to have to dredge the slums of the internet in order to find a couple of deniers who could keep the argument thriving.
The first few days were slow going, but following a brief write-up of my site by Junk Science I was swamped by climate skeptics who did a good job of frightening off the few brave Greens who slogged out the debate with. Whilst there was a lot of rubbish written, the truth was that they didn’t so much frighten the Greens away – they comprehensively demolished them with a more in depth understanding of the science, cleverly thought out arguments, and some very smart answers. If you want to learn about the physics of convection currents, gas chromatography, or any number of climate science topics then read some of the early debates on TalkClimateChange. I didn’t believe a word of it, but I had to admit that these guys were good.
In the following months the situation hardly changed. As the forum continued to grow, as the blog began to catch traffic, and as I continued to try and recruit green members I continued to be disappointed with the debate. In short, and I am sorry to say it, anti-greens …appear to be more willing to comment, more structured, more able to quote peer reviewed research, more apparently rational and apparently wider read and better informed.
Maybe it is easier to win a debate if you have the science on your side.