“Climate change does not respect border; it does not respect who you are – rich and poor, small and big. Therefore, this is what we call ‘global challenges,’ which require global solidarity.” -Ban Ki-moon
Earlier this week, the executive editor of the Heartland Institute published a declaration that he was a climate change skeptic, and put forth the six major reasons why this was so. These reasons were well-thought-out, specific, and best of all, subject to analysis. So, what better way to test the science than to do that analysis, and to see where the chips fell?
That’s exactly what I’ve gone and put together: an in-depth analysis of all six points, to see if there are any good, robust, legitimate reasons to be a climate-change skeptic. This isn’t about scoring points or helping one side win; it’s about sussing out the scientific validity of a position. Is there any?