Monday, July 31, 2017

An official climate debate could be great

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s proposal to hold a TV debate on climate change science makes a lot of sense.

by ,

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s proposal to hold a TV debate on climate change science makes a lot of sense.  This idea is very different from the Red Team exercise that he mentioned previously, which has seen a great deal of discussion, such as here and here. The Red Team exercise would be a highly technical scientific debate. In contrast a TV debate would be designed to, as Pruitt puts it, reach the American people. It could also be a great teaching tool.

How to design such a debate raises some challenging issues. These include how many debaters should participate and who should they be, what the format should be, and at what education level should the scientific issues be discussed?

Taking the last issue first, some detractors are likely to say that the average American cannot understand the scientific debate, because it is simply too technical. It certainly can be technical, but consider this. Many States have adopted the new, so-called Next Generation Science Standards and these have climate change science being first taught in middle school, which is defined as grades 6 through 8. So the average 12 to 14 year old is expected to understand the basics of climate change science............To Read More.....

My TakeIf Pruitt is wanting to have a public debate about global warming that would be understandable to the American public - I have the answer! 

They comment: "How to design such a debate raises some challenging issues. These include how many debaters should participate and who should they be, what the format should be, and at what education level should the scientific issues be discussed?"

Here's the format!

 The below information is from Wikipedia here. 

Here to the right was a picture of the typical setting.
Below are some U-Tube presentations.
1. Here's an example.
2. Another: and
3. Another:

From 1988 and 1989 there was a ten part series of "Ethics in America" "developed and hosted by former CBS News president Fred Friendly and produced by Columbia University Seminars on Media and Society (later renamed Fred Friendly Seminars). It was funded in part by the Annenberg/CPB Project.

"The original series included ten one-hour episodes:"
  • "Anatomy of a Hostile Takeover (Ethics in Business)"
  • "Do Unto Others (Personal Ethics)"
  • "Does Doctor Know Best? (Ethics in Medicine)"
  • "The Human Experiment (Ethics in Scientific Research)"
  • "The Politics of Privacy (Ethics in Journalism)"
  • "Public Trust, Private Interests (Ethics in Government)"
  • "To Defend a Killer (Ethics in Criminal Law)"
  • "Truth on Trial (Ethics in Civil Law)"
  • "Under Orders, Under Fire (Ethics in the Military, Part I)"
  • "Under Orders, Under Fire (Ethics in the Military, Part II)"
You will notice there was never one on the environment.  And the panelists who appeared on the series included: ( I think this is a short list as there was a second series and others appeared deling with ethics in the media and more here.)
The moderators were:
I can't imagine a better platform to expose the truth on this situation.




 

No comments: