Today (May 8) there was a WSJ add by the Heartland Institute (?) suggesting a "challenge debate" between Lord Monckton and Al Gore on the topic: "Global Warming is not a crisis."

Lord Monckton is not a scientist, but apparently has some standing regarding the issue. Since there is so much confusion and disinformation regarding global warming in all of its aspects--and how to address it on a local as well as international basis, would a carefully regulated debate be useful at this time (prior to major new legislation by the US and other nations) be useful?

A debate of that type would only appear to make Gore look defensive. Personally, I don't see the value in it. The facts and evidence are all there. Gore doesn't need to debate this issue with anyone. It makes it seem as if there's something to debate, when he himself has said "the debate is over."

My view is that we have reached the point where denying that human-caused global warming is a threat is like denying the holocaust occurred. People may have the right to express that viewpoint, but it is morally despicable and not worthy of serious debate.

The last time a non-politician debated Al Gore, Admiral Stockdale won the debate
in the VP debate of 1992.

Next Debate Al should do is a Presidential debate with the other candidates.

Focus on 2008 because an outside debate now will just take away from the race
for the president, which is not fair for the other candidates, especially if Al does not get in the race as it seems.

If Al wants to debate, debate the others.

:!: Admiral Stockdale!

"Who am I and why am I here?" Stockdale??

I guess he did provide good material for Phil Hartman to do impressions on Saturday Night Live :lol:

Well said Wayne! he entire scientific community of the world,
except for a minuscule number of holdouts, and some of them are
corporate flunkies, endorse Gore's environmental presentations.

Time to get on with it: the world is not flat, global warming is a
reality, and chicken's don't have lips :good: