Skeptics continue to fool Corcoran

Here’s a letter I sent to the National Post regarding their article on the Munk Debate in response to Terence Corcoran’s highly deceptive post.  It wasn’t published.

I can agree with only one statement of Mr. Corcoran’s analysis of the Munk Debate on climate change last week.  The audience had no way of knowing fact from fiction.

Fact checking would have revealed that the Monbiot/May side had the facts on their side.  For example, in the argument over the impacts of food production, Bjorn Lomborg, the global warming skeptic, was just wrong about what the IPCC said.  Corcoran is even more wrong in defending him, since the facts are easy to look up.

The IPCC report states word for word precisely what Mr. Monbiot says it did in precisely the section he listed from memory.  Furthermore, it refers to a background report that suggests the food problem may be more severe if we fail to adapt as well as we hope to.  Lomborg and Corcoran can deny it all they want, the facts are the facts and Lomborg was wrong.

The skeptics lost the online debate, failed to win a majority in the live debate and only gained an increased percentage vote in the live event because Lomborg bent over backwards to state that he wasn’t a skeptic at all.  His main device was to introduce a technicality and suggest that if you felt that there were other crises that deserved attention as well, then you couldn’t agree with the resolution.

I’d say the debate was an unequivocal win in support of strong climate action.

Adriana Mugnatto-Hamu
Climate Change Critic,
Green Party of Canada