Has the intellectual debate shifted from science to policy in terms of climate change?

In the real world, yes, but not in Y/A.

Well, certainly on YA it's always been the policy debate that's driven the attacks on science. The anti-scientist deniers think they can obviate the policy debate by nullifying the science, but they are all so ill-informed in science that their attempts are feeble, at best.

I have not seen any denier that I would consider to be scientifically literate and logical, even though several claim to be have science backgrounds--one purports to have a degree in chemistry, while another claims that he's a geologist (I'm not counting the laughable "Doctor of Science"). They think that any scientific conclusion that supports AGW has been reached by a conspiracy of socialists, bent on changing their lifestyles. What a bunch of garbage.

It's very sad that there doesn't seem to a single skeptic on YA that has a strong scientific background, so that at least reasonable criticisms of AGW could be advanced. Instead they just keep using the same lame arguments that would fail to impress a scientifically literate high schooler.

Few human beings could disagree that climate replace does not ensue yet optimum could argue that it rather is guy extra approximately. Se that are you speaking approximately?! I save listening to this yet have not seen an concrete information that what you're asserting is actual. Your link is undesirable! Professor Phil Jones who heads the aspects examine Unit says that worldwide warming has exceeded off contained interior the previous and it has by no skill been extra approximately via potential of guy, there has been no worldwide warming for the reason that 1995, and the information for the popular hockey stick graph, which supposedly proves worldwide warming is conviently lacking! In 2002 whilst snow stages have been decrease than ordinary we've been stated that grow to be because of the fact of world warming now that snow stages are above ordinary we are stated it rather is thru technique of the fact worldwide warming, so it rather is it?! you're able to desire to now no longer have it the two concepts! And yet you declare that deniers are disconnected from fact?!

Yes it has, IMHO. This is a wholly negative shift because while majority scientific consensus leans towards acceptance of AGW theory, there isn't quite the same degree of concordance among the real players, and since there is always a disconnect between science and policy, this may serve to stifle further innovation in truly novel research in the field.

Great question.

No, the policy is pretty much dead right now, because of economic concerns, and people are finding out the Harvard lawyer with no executive experience you guys elected as President really doesn't care about global warming, he just wants to wear that really neat jacket that says president and fly around on the jet.

Skeptics won the SCIENCE, but are losing to the socialist "intellectuals". The goal of AGW is to create a new world order where an elite few run the world by taking wealth and access to tools needed to fight them. The socialist have taken away education by making "dana's master of ..." that spread the lies.

Read this paper and tell us with a straight face that the scientist want a socialist system. They want all people to live with just 1 cord of wood for heat and cooking, whether you live in Alaska or Ecuador.

http://www.occ.gov.uk/activities/stern_papers/Key%...

No doubt about it. Other than a few stragglers, the vast majority of scientists and policymakers are now debating how we should address global warming and climate change as opposed to what is causing them. The US government is trying to put together carbon cap and trade legislation, many climate scientists recently met in Copenhagen to urge policymakers to act more swiftly in addressing the issue, and really outside of layman websites like YA there is little discussion about climate change causes anymore.

Now there is still discussion about things like climate sensitivity, feedbacks, and policy, but the debate over AGW really is settled.

Another way to phrase that would be:

it's not getting any warmer so one side is in a hurry to declare victory and get its agenda passed.

EDIT - you can vote thumbs down all you want - time will tell whether I'm right or wrong.

The problem with DISCUSSING policy is this--

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510937,00.html