Prominent Scientists Who Claim Human Activity Is Causing a Climate Crisis Invited to Debate Scientists Who Are ‘Climate Realists’. Event Moderated by Legendary Journalist John Stossel in Times Square will live-stream on YouTube from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. on Monday, September 23
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL – On September 23, the day the United Nations holds its Climate Summit in New York City during its upcoming General Assembly session, The Heartland Institute has challenged prominent scientists to explain their hypothesis of a human-caused climate crisis in a debate with skeptical scientists moderated by John Stossel.
The event will be live-streamed from the Manhattan Ballroom at the Marriott Marquis in Times square.
Space in the venue is limited, but media can apply for access by contacting Heartland Institute Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org or call/text 312-731-9364.
Go to the live-stream link on YouTube here.
Heartland has invited to the debate several scientists who are often quoted in media reports about their grave concerns about the current state and future of the climate: Kevin Trenberth, Michael Mann, Don Wuebbles, Katherine Hayhoe, Brenda Ekwurzel, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. [NOTE: Trenberth and Ekwurzel politely declined, but peers have also received invitations from Heartland.]
Those on the “realist” side of the debate will be Patrick Michaels, David Legates, and Willie Soon – all prominent scientists who have often defended their findings and views in public.
WHAT: Climate Challenge: Bright Lights, Big City … Bigger Debate
WHEN: Monday, September 23, 2019 from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.
WHERE: New York Marriott Marquis, 1535 Broadway, New York, NY 10036
LINK TO THE LIVE-STREAM: https://youtu.be/faQssBpFvmo
The
Heartland Institute is known globally as the leading think tank promoting scientists who are skeptical of a human-caused climate crisis. Visit the website for its 13 Interntional Conferences on Climate Change at
this link, and review the volumes of the Climate Change Reconsidered series by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, published by Heartland, at
this link.
“Scientific knowledge and public understanding of important issues benefit from more information, discussion, and debate, not less,” said
James Taylor, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at The Heartland Institute. “I hope and expect this event will advance scientific knowledge by facilitating more cooperative and productive discussions
among expert scientists regarding an asserted climate crisis hypothesis.”
“It is long past time that we have a real debate from people on both sides of this issue about what is happening to our climate,” said Heartland Institute Director of Communications Jim Lakely. “This debate has never been more important than now, especially considering the views and plans put forth by the Democratic candidates for president.
“Every one of them, and the United Nations, blame human activity for global warming, insist it will be catastrophic to life on Earth, and demand big changes to the way Americans live, work, eat, travel, and build,” Lakely added. “Doesn’t the wholesale reordering of our society demand at least a little bit of public debate? We think so.”
The Heartland Institute is a 35-year-old national nonprofit organization headquartered in Arlington Heights, Illinois. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. For more information, visit our website or call 312/377-4000.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I wish I could participate in this exercise – maybe I could bring up my ranking from a measly 250 or something on the Nature Climate Denier list (sorry Moderator – that’s their term, not mine).
My boss, Energy Secretary Rick Perry is right up there near the top. But I’d say that I am far more skeptical of AGW than he is.
Seriously, I hope that the takeaway from the discussion from the folks on my side is – There is nothing about CO2 in the air to worry about. Absolutely nothing at all, and there are so many more important things in the world to devote time and attention to.
There was a debate in Charleston, WV, maybe four months ago, between Curry & Moore vs. Mann & Tetley.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6sKPSKkvVs
Moore.
All the people Heartland has invited need to be contestants on “Alone”. Some of the people work for the federal government and are part of the Trump Administration they should be reminded of this. They should also be furloughed to the “Alone” show to show us how to live a low-CO2 footprint.
I would consider it a PSA of concern citizens and federal workers.
Great idea but no way anybody from one side shows up. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose for one thing. Their side is way ahead using effective propaganda and well designed one way/sided communication tools. Bill Nye might be your only chance because he seems the most likely to shoot himself in the foot by going outside what the others know is. Winning strategy.
But even he must be aware that he really doesn’t know anything about authentic climate science and would fail catastrophically if forced to explain the science behind his hundreds of scary sound bites.
Broken hockey stick protruding from tub of lard?
In response to Richard S. Courtney.
My computer connection is intermittent, and with delay in posting, I often don’t know if it took.
Chicken. They hide behind articles and peer reviews among themselves but they wouldn’t debate unless they can twitch the data or intimidate opponents . Alarmists, not alarmists, they should be called what they are, liars in the pockets of the social engineered globalist agenda.
Should there be a failure by alarmists to appear, prepare a multi-media presentation of alarmist arguments including video, tweets, headlines, quotes, etc. that the skeptical scientists can address.
Snorefest….unfortunately I have yet to see one climate scientist that is good at debating.
Just as matter and anti-matter cannot exist in the same space – so it is with science and anti-science