All:
I am very willing to debate the issues of AGW science, AGW-promotion and AGW-scepticism.
My willingness to debate the issues is demonstrated by my response to “Eddie” when he challenged my statements here.
But I am not willing to participate in a public debate of me with anonymous smear mongers whose lies and insults would be contemptible in a school playground.
Lies, defamations and insults of me are not “the issues”. So, I said I would refuse to debate with ‘Boris’ because his postings consist of defamations, infantile lies and insults. And for the same reason I will not debate with ‘Jeb’ (who may be the same person).
Now a posting under the name of Jeb (whomever or whatever he/she/it is) says to me:
“Does this indicate your reluctance to debate the facts without resorting to name calling? Once you have started slinging mud you can no longer claim the high ground or play the victim.”
I repeat that it does not indicate a reluctance by me to debate the facts (with or without name calling). I started no “mud slinging” and I have only responded to the mud thrown at me by the person or persons writing here under the pseudonyms of ‘Boris’ and ‘Jeb’. Indeed, as those who read the above postings can see, I have been “the victim” of their barrage of lies, insults and innuendoes, so I do not need to “play” at anything.
The abuse from him/her/it/them is clearly intended to obscure the issues and to avoid scrutiny of their assertions concerning AGW.
Driving the informed out of any debate of AGW-issues is a common tactic of AGW-promoters. And their use of this tactic tells all that needs to be known about their own view of the validity of their arguments.
Richard
