The Instigator
Stupidape
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
bearski
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Jail climate change deniers.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/19/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 254 times Debate No: 94839
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Con

I'm against jailing Climate change deniers. It is a violation of free speech. I also think it sets a bad precedence. I would hate to see a 15 year old teenager go to jail for running off at the mouth.

Nevertheless some people think we should jail climate change deniers. [0] What's next jailing flat Earth people and hate speech? [1]

0. http://www.washingtontimes.com...
1. http://www.theflatearthsociety.org...
bearski

Pro

There is an overwhelming scientific consensus climate change presents a serious risk to the future of the Earth and to mankind. Many of the threats we face due to climate change are insidious and while with others the connection may not be noticed by the deniers. But they are real and serious. Among these are the spread of potentially lethal diseases such as that caused by the Zika virus. Other diseases formerly confined to the tropics will spread across North America and Europe.

There is also overwhelming scientific consensus climate change is being caused by human activity.

There are a limited number of circumstances under which free speech can be restricted. One of them is child pornography. The reason that can be banned with violating the 1st Amendment is the harm caused to children in the production of child porn is of such magnitude the normal means of combating bad speech-- more speech is not adequate or sufficient.

The ignorance peddled by climate change deniers many of whom like child pornographers do so for greed. Those threatened most by the adverse effects of climate change are children. These will include teenagers sent to fight the increasing number of wars and conflicts which will likely occur.

Yes the risk is too high to allow this ignorance to continue to be peddled.

Should we jail people who write and utter falsehoods about climate change? If need be yes.
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Con

The problem with your argument is humans have been wrong with a lot of ideas. I find most of your argument fits under the ad populum fallacy. [2] Just because the majority of scientists think man made climate change is real and a threat, does not mean the scientists are correct. At one time we thought the Earth was flat and the sun revolved around the Earth.


" "Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?"

If you answered the latter, you're among a quarter of Americans who also got it wrong, according to a new report by the National Science Foundation. " [3]


There is a chance that the entire global warming/climate change is a scam. That the deniers are whistle blowers. If we start jailing whistle blowers we could be in a lot of trouble. [4] Remember that 97% of climate change scientists agree. That means 3% don't, those 3% could be legitimate whistle blowers.

Some of the scientist claim there is bullying going on to reach the consensuses. [5] There is talk of data manipulation. [6] Honestly, I will not stoop by backing up the deniers. I think the chances of the deniers being wrong is at least 99%. Nevertheless, there is that 1% chance. More importantly, it sets a precedence as seen in r1.

Finally, and perhaps my strongest argument. Assume for a second that the deniers are wrong. Not much of an assumption. Jailing the deniers could backfire. Causing them to become martyrs per say. Holding back political change and giving the deniers a louder voice.Thanks for debating and being respectful.

I am not a climate change denier, I just feel both sides of the debate need to be represented.


Sources
2. http://www.skepdic.com...
3. http://abcnews.go.com...
4. https://www.gov.uk...
5.https://www.youtube.com...
6. http://www.forbes.com...
bearski

Pro

We can't in good conscience risk the lives of potentially hundreds of millions of people because of an extremely remote chance the scientific consensus is wrong. You want both sides to be able to debate-- but there is nothing really to debate
Debate Round No. 2
Stupidape

Con

I reassert my strongest argument in r2. "Finally, and perhaps my strongest argument. Assume for a second that the deniers are wrong. Not much of an assumption. Jailing the deniers could backfire. Causing them to become martyrs per say. Holding back political change and giving the deniers a louder voice. Thanks for debating and being respectful. " stupidape

Jailing the climate change deniers could backfire. Cause the deniers to become martyrs and more suspicion and doubt to be cast.
bearski

Pro

We could also find out years from now that children aren't harmed in the production of child porn even though the evidence right now is substantial and overwhelming children are being harmed by child porn. Even though that remote possibility exists it does not mean we shouldn't jail child pornographers.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by epidexipteryx 6 months ago
epidexipteryx
Sorry for the mistype I meant to say there is no scientific consensus, not "there is no con concensus"
Posted by epidexipteryx 6 months ago
epidexipteryx
The con is wrong. There is no con consensus:
1. http://www.wsj.com...
2. https://m.youtube.com...
Posted by SM29 6 months ago
SM29
No one's going to accept this challenge. All you have to do is quote the First Amendment.

Even Greenpeace radicals don't think climate change deniers should be jailed, just silenced
No votes have been placed for this debate.