Not exact matches
Rather than public evaluation of the evidence, independent validation of the models,
and robust public debate over
adaptation vs
mitigation, climate alarmists like Lewandowsky et al. try to frustrate the scientific method, prevent debate,
and impose their incredibly
expensive mitigation policies.
What is particularly embarrassing for Nature, whose coverage of this issue has been second to none, is that they don't even bother with # 2 — even though they have a full article devoted to geo - engineering (a puff piece by someone who «now participates in scientific research on the topic»), another full article on
adaptation,
and yet another full article just on capturing CO2 from the air, which even one of its major proponents is quoted as saying is «the most
expensive climate -
mitigation technology.»