Irony alert. The reason we need the red-blue debate is because the scientific establishment has gotten so arrogant that they demean and ostracize scientists that raise scientifically reasonable objections to alarmist narrative. If there is a concern about scientifically unsound arguments getting aired as part of this exercise then the alarmists scientists only have themselves to blame because they should have respectively engaged their skeptical colleagues instead of driving them out of the field.
wait, what? Are you stating the scientific establishment (your phrasing) is on one side of the referenced red-blue debate? Which side is that wascally scientific establishment on?