It is unfair to accuse Doom of not allowing dissent. I would know as I have accused him of being way off base on his analysis of the Russia/Ukraine conflict - multiple times. He responded with his points which I still disagreed with and there was no budging on either of our parts, yet I was not booted off this forum. I was not warned. I was not denigrated. I was not even discouraged from continuing to post my opinion. I am thankful for that and respect Doom even more than I did before for this reason and the best way I could "thank" him for this freedom of expression was to no longer bring up the conflict and my opinions on it beyond when I made my point. That's why you haven't heard me talk about it ever since. It no longer serves any purpose other than to argue. Even when Wilk continues his "we have Putin spies on this board" rants. I just smile and ignore these comments. 

 

My experience with Doom is not unique. He has allowed a lot of dissent while he tries his best to maintain the civility and utility of this board. That's it. Do I think he is biased on some things? Well, that's like asking me if I think he's human. Of course he is but he is entitled to his views just as we are allowed our views. The point is not who is correct. The value is the discussion itself. 

 

Which leads me to the reason he needs to moderate and delete certain points. Some posts end up being incendiary, even if they were not meant to be. I'm sure you can understand that.  

 

How many great back and forth civil arguments have we experienced on this board that were so well argued that we are left lost in our thoughts at the end of the thread? That is what makes this board great. We can't always reach a definitive conclusion, but opposing views provide important food for thought nevertheless. But some comments are not constructive or civil and that is where the intervention is needed.

 

As for political leanings and its relation to what you insultingly refer to as "climate denial," I think there is an incorrect assumption that the discussions here are weighted toward the "right" as opposed to the "left."

 

I see it as the logical, scientific, honest opinions versus the zealotry of a quasi religiosity regarding the climate change cult. I say this as a real environmentalist. Someone who lobbied governments for green grants, started a community environmental group, volunteers for tree planting events twice every year, represented CSP (solar) companies, pushed municipalities to increase insulation and water preservation standards and so on... As a real environmentalist, I care equally about air quality, soil nutrient density, ocean/river/lake water purity, forest preservation and waste disposal. I am very concerned about toxic tailing ponds, not to mention child abuse by lithium, nickel, cobalt, silver and manganese miners supplying the "transition" cult.  

 

And I know that the planet has been warming very gradually for the last 22,000 years, since the end of the last ice age. I also know that at the planet's warmest, due to the highest CO2 concentration, it was the greenest (oh how effin' ironic). I understand that climate, by nature, is ever evolving. I also know that factors such as methane emissions from oceans and volcanic eruptions contribute much more than human "pollution" does. I know that solar cycles greatly affect weather patterns that are commonly attributed to human-caused global climate cooling/warming/change (depending on what mode the schitzo cult is in). 

 

I know that the likes of Gore, DiCaprio, Obama, and Gates, all of whom claimed Florida would be under water 16 years ago, all have expansive water-front estates. And these happen to be the people dictating the narrative that we are expected to swallow, hook, line and sinker.

 

Despite the fact that their carbon footprints individually would shame small cities and despite the obvious financial conflicts that they have pushing their narratives, there are still people who want to ignore all the above mentioned inconsistencies, contradictions and obvious red flags and believe in the cult's premise that the average joe is fully to blame for the destruction of the planet which seems to perennially be 12 years away.

 

If you want to be one of those people, then by all means join that club. But I am a real environmentalist and I will not divert my attention from the real and genuine environmental concerns facing humanity which have nothing to do with CO2 emissions. And I will most certainly not pit environmental issues against our need for energy abundance. These are separate issues and they both need our attention equally and concurrently. 

 

It just so happens that those who side with logic and reality are deemed "right wing" on this issue. But "right wing" really has become a moniker for those who think for themselves and are intellectually honest. It has little or nothing to do with their conservatism/republicanism. And for the record, I used to be left of center (classical liberal). Then a centrist, and these days I am apparently more to the right than ever before. Funny thing is, it's not me that's moving. I've always been a JFK democrat on the spectrum. It's the political culture that is rapidly zooming into the lunatic left hellscape that makes it look like I am changing my personal political leanings. And I am hearing from many others that feel the same way. Most of whom have traditionally been classical liberal. 

 

My suggestion is to stop addressing complaints to doom. It is his board and he is doing a damn fine job of moderating it.  To grow thicker skin and not have to respond to every barb or perceived slight (mischaracterizations of your positions excepted), and finally, to accept that often people have their views for good reasons even if you can't understand them. This place can be a very valuable training ground to open your mind, break some of your hard beliefs and.. *gasp* learn...