You don’t have to be right to get right. But this is far to often what debating is about. To get right. Myself, I prefer dialogue. Not necessarily to reach consensus, but to encourage logical arguments, reflection and constructive social change.
It’s alright to have different opinions. But to be able to trust an outcome of a discussion, at least we have to agree on basic facts. What we can see today, in opinions of climate change, is that we don’t agree on those basic facts – the collection of original temperature data – which practically makes any scientific result based upon such facts useless.
In a scientific view, It doesn’t matter who’s right or wrong. If the basic facts are questionable, for example on such ground that they can’t be verified as genuine, the findings can not be objectively trusted and should by all means be questioned.
It’s easy to get right, when you don’t recognize the right for anyone to say that you are wrong.
Now, Mr. Al Gore has declined to lecture at the climate change conference in Copenhagen 2009. Perhaps that is for the best, but still, the fact remains: It’s easy to win the debate when it comes to confusion whether it’s really a debate or a moralizing monologue, further more no questions allowed.
So, in the meaning of getting right, Mr. Gore seems to have no intention of putting himself in a position where he would have to answer to his previous statements. Therefore, the debate is over. Obviously.
However, this does not stop the rest of the society from discussing these issues, based upon reliable facts. But for those among us that prefer monologue instead of dialogue, for those who wants the debate to be over, for those I have nothing more to say.
And therefore I believe that Mr. Gore should finally shut up.