Surprising and welcome news…*

I’m pleased to say Adam Corner has agreed – in principle – to the reciprocal discussion I suggested –  “Understanding AGW Believers”.  Here’s the comment he posted in reply to me on his website:

http://talkingclimate.org/understanding-climate-scepticism-a-sceptic-responds/

I am in prin­ciple up for what you suggest……let´s see how this second round of dis­cus­sion goes down, if it doesnt feel like I am per­son­ally being pounced on too much, i am prob­ably up for taking part in your idea

So,  I think we may get this underway, which will be a good thing for everyone interested in advancing rational understanding of thi issue in scientific and human terms. If anyone has any thoughts on how best to frame it, who would be a good candidate to hot the discussion etc . then leave a comment here or on the other blogs that are talking about this, or email me at the address on the contact page.
 
 
 
*(The image is supposed to be QS reeling in surprise on reading AC’s response. As can be inferred I don’t fit the standard old white male paradigm AC talks of as typical for “skeptics”, which  in fact (the paradigm, not  my failure to conform to it)  might be an interesting topic to include in the discussion)
Advertisements
Comments
2 Responses to “Surprising and welcome news…*”
  1. This is getting a bit hard to follow. Thanks to your blog, I’ve just discovered the article at Judith Curry’s Climate etc with its 700+ comments!
    Your suggestion of a reciprocal discussion is an excellent one, as is that of a neutral venue, though I think the essential point is that there should be a single agreed venue, with an open comments policy, since the current discussion spread over half a dozen blogs is clearly impossible.
    Your previous article takes the combative position favoured by Barry Woods and most other commenters at Bishop Hill. I’ve explained at length (but on several different threads) why I don’t think this is the most productive way forward. But that’s more a question of tactics than a fundamental disagreement. Many thanks for your positive role in all this!

    • quidsapio says:

      I absolutely agree about the single venue. Where would be best? Adam has tweeted me that he’ll be up for the discussion in a few weeks. I’m thinking maybe we should all communicate via email rather than commenting on the wide multiplicity of fora we all visit 😉

      What do you think would be a good location for the next round?

      I suppose I was quite combative – maybe a little more than was needed. But I’m also aware of the pitfall in trying to debate from inside a paradigm that has already invalidated your argument a priori. It’s a thing no one, however skilled in argument, is going to be able to overcome in the end.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: