They could vote the most obnoxious scientist off the island until the sole survivor gets to explain climate science to the masses:
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt wants scientists to debate the science of climate change, possibly on television.
Pruitt’s idea, outlined to Reuters, is part of a program he’s organizing to challenge the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change, including that human activity via greenhouse gases is far and away the primary cause of global warming.
“There are lots of questions that have not been asked and answered,” Pruitt said regarding climate science.
“Who better to do that than a group of scientists ... getting together and having a robust discussion for all the world to see,” he said, according to Reuters.
Asked if the debate should happen on television, Pruitt continued, “I think so. I think so. I mean, I don’t know yet, but you want this to be open to the world. You want this to be on full display. I think the American people would be very interested in consuming that. I think they deserve it.”
via thehill.com
The debate idea is cool because they are just so very informative:
Industry shill scientist: “Everything I see, [industry] has no respect for this person.”
Climate scientist: “Well, that’s because he’d rather have a puppet on the EPA science advisory board.”
Shill: “No puppet. No Puppet.”
Scientist: “It’s pretty clear...,”
Shill: “You’re the puppet!”
Yes, debates are a good way to provide useful information.
I've been known to have dumb ideas but, risking criticism, here goes: Or, we could have some sort of written forum where, after years of careful research, results are written up and distributed to peers who help decide what research is worthy of being released by the forum "for all the world to see."
