Global-warming public intellectuals have warned the media that if they allow skeptics to have a voice in stories, they will boycott giving comment.
If the future of science is really at risk, then surely not debating evolution is folly.
Good grief, if we face total calamity by the end of the century, why in the world wouldn’t you debate the science?
As a systems architect, I’ve spent decades designing and implementing large and complex systems of information systems.
Does the “scientific consensus” mean that only scientists who follow the majority are entitled to have their say?