WHY WON'T AL GORE DEBATE AGW WITH SKEPTICAL SCIENTISTS?

BECAUSE HE KNOWS HE WILL LOSE, AND THAT WILL UPSET THE LEFT'S DREAM OF TAXING THE CRAP OUT OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE.

FACTS HERE. EXCERPT:

the list of folks challenging soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore to put up or shut up continues to grow, of course, with little notice from an adoring media.

Next up wanting to take shots at the Global Warmingist-in-Chief is best-selling author Dennis Avery.

As reported by PR Newswire Monday (emphasis added throughout):

Mr. Avery is co-author of Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years. Both Al Gore and Dennis Avery have New York Times best-selling books on global warming, but with opposite conclusions. […]

Avery joins Lord Christopher Monckton (former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher advisor), Bjorn Lomborg (Danish economist), author Michael Crichton, Prof. S. Fred Singer (former director of the U.S. National Weather Service), Tim Ball, Ph.D. (historical climatologist), Prof. Ian Clark (University of Ottawa), and Prof. Richard Lindzen (MIT) among others.

Of course, the media never report these challenges. After all, why should they? The debate’s over:

NOTE:

NPR SPONSORED AN OXFORD-STYLE DEBATE ON AGW.

IT FEATURED A BEFORE-AND-AFTER POLL OF THE AUDIENCE.

IT WAS BETWEEN A FEW OF THESE SKEPTICS AND A FEW FAMOUS FOLKS FROM THE AGW ECO-NUTSIE CROWD.

THE POLLING INDICATED THAT THE AGW ECO-NUTISES GOT CREAMED:

In this debate, the proposition was: "Global Warming Is Not a Crisis." In a vote before the debate, about 30 percent of the audience agreed with the motion, while 57 percent were against and 13 percent undecided. The debate seemed to affect a number of people: Afterward, about 46 percent agreed with the motion, roughly 42 percent were opposed and about 12 percent were undecided.

IOW: NEARLY HALF THE AGW ECO-NUTSIES IN THE CROWD SWITCHED SIDES AFTER ONE FREAKIN' DEBATE OF ALL THE FACTS.

THERE HASN'T BEEN A SERIOUS DEBATE EVER SINCE.

WONDER WHY?

THE LEFTIST AGW CROWD DOESN'T WANT YOU TO HEAR BOTH SIDES IF THE DEBATE.

IT'S SORT OF LIKE PROSECUTING A PERSON FOR A CRIME WITHOUT LETTING THE JURY HEAR FROM THE DEFENSE.