Comments on: AGW Today: The Goracle Is Still Too Chicken To Debate

By: Reasic

Reasic — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:45:57 +0000

manbearpig,

Yes, I realize that may seem like a contradiction, but what I meant by the “no debate needed” point was that AGW cannot be disproved by a public debate. One can have them to his heart’s desire, but if the purpose is to disprove AGW, the effort will be fruitless.

Now, my point for asking for a debate with Teach is basically to point out the irony in his criticism of Gore supposedly ducking a debate when he always runs from my arguments. Talk about walking the walk, huh?

Of course, in Teach’s world, he can completely disregard evidence. He can say whatever he wants about people, regardless of the facts, and continues to do so on a daily basis.

By: manbearpig

manbearpig — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:07:21 +0000

Didn’t you just say that no debate was needed? Now you want a debate? 8-}

By: Reasic

Reasic — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:26:34 +0000

First and most importantly, AGW does not need to be proven in a debate. The case for AGW has been laid out in scientific literature. To date, there have been no valid rebuttals, which is EXACTLY why deniers would like to carry on a debate whenever possible. This provides a welcome distraction from actual scientific evidence, and instead, gives them an opportunity to spout bogus denier talking points, without any evidence to back them up. It is a forum that gives deniers a tremendous upper hand, as one cannot possibly go over the plethora of scientific research on the subject.

He would certainly fear having to answer question about why there were so many falsehoods in his award winning movie…

What falsehoods? Do you have a list or a link?

…and why, if he believes Mankind is killing Gaia, Gore has changed his lifestyle to one where he puts out even more amounts of CO2.

As I’ve said time and time again, and you’ve continually ignored, Gore is carbon neutral. Do you know what that means?

Please stop posting about that which you do not understand. At least engage me in a debate, as you so wish Gore would do. It baffles me how you are completely ignorant of all things related to climate science, and yet are more than willing to spew denier talking points.