Canadian Politics Today

I judge the quality of science of a field based on how it treats its dissenters. A field where dissenters are treated with respect gives me confidence that the majority conclusions are well founded. A field where dissenters are attacked and have their livelihoods threatened tells me that the majority conclusions are not well founded and the majority fears people who would examine them.

Climate science is a field where dissenters are attacked. This means I have zero confidence in any claims made by the majority. If their claims were really that strong they would not need to respond in the way they do.

outside of outright cranks, charlatans and wackos... name the names! Given your staunch, year upon year, unrelenting position on this, surely there must be literally hundreds of your so-called dissenters who have been attacked... had their livelihoods threatened. Name the names - cause, like there sure haven't been any attacks, vilification and undermining of legitimate scientists by your preferred "denier/do nothing/adapt-r-us" crowd, hey! C'mon, name the names of your poor downtrodden. Name the names!