Should the governments of the world ban debate on global warming?

Question

Since the debate on global warming is done now and the whole world knows it is true, should the government outlaw any speech against global warming?

Since the nay-sayers are doing nothing but inhibiting any progress to help clean up our dying planet, I believe they should be oulawed. I know it seems draconian and many will shout "Stalinist" but this issue is too important to get caught up in constant debate.

United Nations!! Outlaw anti Global Warming speech now!!

Answer 1

no government should ban or inhibit the right to free speech,but sadly some countries do not have the freedom of speech. but debate on cause, solution or any other debate is good and more debate is needed as well as education for out of debate may come  a few solutions or ideas that may help.

Answer 2

You sound as bad as they do.  The answer is h**l no.  I'm a Conservative which means conserving resources, managing them, spending money cautiously and wisely, and providing for the future.  Theodore Roosevelt, Republican and Conservative, was the first world leader to speak out on the importance of Conservation of Natural Resources both economically as "the foundation of prosperity", and strategically, as a vital component of National Security.  His speeches on the subject were prophetic, and still ring true today.

Don't confuse the Neocons with Conservatives.  They are nothing alike.  You've heard them post in extremis time and again about how they favor profligate squandering of natural resources and the absence of planning.  To a Conservative, those are liberal positions, not Conservative positions.  Liberal means using resources liberally, not conservatively.  You've heard them mock religion.  Religion has always been an important Conservative value.  While it will always be a subject of debate and discussion, the Conservative view is that it is an important piece of our heritage as a species, whether you see it as the foundation of moral and ethical thinking, or as a subject like Art or history to be studied in order to better understand ourselves and our culture.  This makes it a resource that has value  and something to be conserved.  Denunciation of reliogion is a trait of some liberals, but ALL Communists, and NO Conservatives.  They don't even know their Right from their Left politically, and will call someone a Fascist or n**i and a Liberal or Communist or Socialist right in the same sentence!

Neocons will claim that being a Conservative is just a matter of walking in the room, calling everyone else a Communist, telling them to leave the country, and it's Miller Time.  This makes them appear to you and me as gibbering baboons, hopping up and down and hurling their f***s about.  Be that as it may, I wore the uniform of my country to defend their right to do that if that is their choice, and I must disagree with your suggestion.

Answer 3

It is frightening that anyone would think this way. Remember, the theory of AGW is...well..it's still just a theory with very little evidence.

By outlawing any speech against it, or banning debate, you prevent any further scientific advancements in the field. Science is all about debate, and by banning debate you give what was once empiricism to the highest bidder (or the guy with the most power)

You would probably ruin all scientific discovery by creating consequences for challenging the established science, which is how the greatest discoveries of all time have come about. Sounds like the flat-earthers are at work once again.

This is the warmer mindset in action....frightening to say the least

Answer 4

What ever you say, The global warming will continue it's way,

no way to stop it, It's a nature. when it is formed, it must melt anyway. glacier

Answer 5

fascist - have you ever heard of the first ammendment - yeah we'll just get rid of that.  I hope you are not serious.  Yeah lets outlaw your speech while we're at it.

Answer 6

How is this possible?

I believe in the right of free speech, and that includes the right to label anyone who relies primarily on Fox News or right wing blogs for their scientific information as an IDIOT.

Anyone who believes that the world is not round = an idiot.

Anyone who believes that the Apollo moon missions were a hoax = an idiot.

Anyone who believes that global warming is a hoax = an idiot.

Answer 7

I agree with you on the fact that global warming is real, but I am completely against outlawing any type of speech.

As Voltaire said, "I disagree with what you have to say but will fight to the death to protect your right to say it."

I think that while most scientists agree that global warming is a fact, the thing to do is to educate people.  Outlawing speech against global is not going to stop global warming.  The nay-sayers will still pollute, whether or not they can talk about how they don't believe in global warming.  But if we educate everyone, then they will have evidence that shows it exists and then they will not contribute to global warming anymore.

Answer 8

National Geographic must have it wrong than http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...

what do they know??

d**n probing scincests!!

Answer 9

"...And this is how freedom dies - to the sound of thunderous applause."

People like you are truly frightening. The n***s also believed as you do. And you probably don't even see the connection. I strongly suggest you watch the Planet of the Apes movies, paying special attention to the orangutang gatekeepers of wisdom. You sound a lot like them.

Answer 10

No.  Free speech is still a core value.  And there's really no need.  The "skeptics" are a tiny minority.

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/a...

And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/fu...

EVERY major scientific organization has issued an official statement that this is real, and mostly caused by us.  The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

Answer 11

Yeah! ... and let's not stop there!

Let's ban any discussion of creationism, since everyone knows that that's been proven wrong.

And the Loch Ness monster nay-sayers should be shut up, too. We've got pictures, dammit!

And we need to shut up the anti-abortion people, there are too many people who want abortions whenever they are convenient and the "right-to-life" arguments are draconian and SO judgmental.

And we need to shut up anybody who believes in free speech because they get inhibit the government from doing what is best.

And pro-election people; they need to be shut down, too.

And since we're not going to let anyone discuss creationism we'll need to shut up anyone who believes in a Supreme Being... and the Wiccans and other animists, too.

Yeah! We need the governments of the world to silence any debate ... to save us ... from ourselves.

Answer 12

No. Governments should not be able to do that period. And even if the could ban speech there really wouldn't be any point. If global warming was really real (and I say it is) then people should be able to convince the nay-sayers. And that's exactly what's happening right now. There's really no logic behind banning debate on the subject matter.