Wednesday, March 11, 2009
ST ANDREWS UNIVERSITY GLOBAL WARMING DEBATE - SCEPTICS WIN - MEDIA SILENT
Perhaps somebody in the media could explain why this isn't newsworthy while denying that the media is a fascist network of paid liars. I suspect not.
I missed this letter yesterday & only saw it because another writer congratulated Richard Courtney today:
"last Wednesday, the debating society of St Andrews University debated the motion "This house believes global warming is a global crisis". It was defeated.
As I said in my address at St Andrews: "There's no evidence for man-made global warming; none, not any of any kind."
After I stated this, the citing of one solitary piece of evidence for anthropogenic global warming could have been used to demolish and ridicule my case, which was the foundation of our opposition to the motion.
We won on "truth", and climate realists always would win on "truth" in an open debate.
This demonstrates what can happen when people – including those in Scotland – are exposed to both sides of the global warming debate."
As an example of the accurate & unbiased media we have the only mention I could find of it worldwide on Google News was this pre-match puff piece from the main alarmist speaker.
"The expert who dubbed global warming a "weapon of mass destruction" will present the scientific evidence for global warming and outline the actions required to halt climate change at a public event in St Andrews this week"
Clearly the fact that he lost & the sceptics prevailed was not so newsworthy.
UPDATE
There is a full review of the debate here. Ross Finnie was the leading alarmist speaker & despite his clear ignorance of the subject (& his previous claim that everybody who doubts catastrophic warming is "from Mars") I think he is a capable speaker. I faced him at a Lib Dem conference debating nuclear power & he had the wit not to try to debate on the facts of nuclear power but entirely on the conference not embarrassing the leadership by voting the other way. That appeal purely to party loyalty worked.
I missed this letter yesterday & only saw it because another writer congratulated Richard Courtney today:
"last Wednesday, the debating society of St Andrews University debated the motion "This house believes global warming is a global crisis". It was defeated.
As I said in my address at St Andrews: "There's no evidence for man-made global warming; none, not any of any kind."
After I stated this, the citing of one solitary piece of evidence for anthropogenic global warming could have been used to demolish and ridicule my case, which was the foundation of our opposition to the motion.
We won on "truth", and climate realists always would win on "truth" in an open debate.
This demonstrates what can happen when people – including those in Scotland – are exposed to both sides of the global warming debate."
As an example of the accurate & unbiased media we have the only mention I could find of it worldwide on Google News was this pre-match puff piece from the main alarmist speaker.
"The expert who dubbed global warming a "weapon of mass destruction" will present the scientific evidence for global warming and outline the actions required to halt climate change at a public event in St Andrews this week"
Clearly the fact that he lost & the sceptics prevailed was not so newsworthy.
UPDATE
There is a full review of the debate here. Ross Finnie was the leading alarmist speaker & despite his clear ignorance of the subject (& his previous claim that everybody who doubts catastrophic warming is "from Mars") I think he is a capable speaker. I faced him at a Lib Dem conference debating nuclear power & he had the wit not to try to debate on the facts of nuclear power but entirely on the conference not embarrassing the leadership by voting the other way. That appeal purely to party loyalty worked.
