The Great Climate Debate

After reviewing the "Friends of Science" site I was less than impressed with its arguments and scientific models. Even when I first opened the page and hadn't read anything, it already seemed like a hoax. The bright yellow, "click here to donate!" button and the linked prompt to listen to a radio ad seemed less credible than the "how to talk to a climate skeptic" site. Even the title, "friends of science" was strangely off-putting... probably because it reminded me of what a Scientology recruitment website might look like (no offense meant to those of you that are scientologists) it just seemed a little ridiculous and ultimately, wasn't very convincing.

I found the "talking to a climate skeptic" website most interesting as it broke down the levels of denial among climate skeptics and reasoning behind it. For those who don't believe global warming is occurring, I'm sure this site is offensive since it classifies their arguments as silly, naive and misinformed or blatantly uninformed. Though I agree that climate skeptics are "in the wrong" as it were, I found it interesting how borderline hostile and passive aggressive the site was toward the other side of the debate. I suppose since this topic is politically charged and draws a lot of excitement in the scientific community there is good reason for a fierce debate over climate change but the competition in pushing theories of whether or not global warming etc. is occurring seems a bit extreme to me. These efforts in defending and promoting opposing opinions would certainly better serve our society if they were instead trying to prevent the problem or solving any number of environmental situations that are compromising the planet and our future on it. In the words of Rodney King (and many others), can't we all just get along?