Climate Cultists and Global Climate Change

This is a great article by Stephen Hayward at the Weekly Standard:

After all the sound and fury of the last few months, where does the issue of climate change stand? The cruel irony for the climateers is that the more they hype the apocalypse of future climate change, the more farcically inadequate are their proposed remedies. Global primary energy demand is going to double over the next generation, and there is no one who thinks hydrocarbons—especially coal—aren’t going to play a large role in providing this energy, especially in developing nations. While the EPA tries to shut down most or all of our more than 500 remaining coal plants, there are currently more than 1,000 coal plants under construction elsewhere in the world. If catastrophic climate change is somewhere in our future, the only serious remedy is to deploy new sources of affordable and abundant non- or low-carbon energy. The EPA plan does little in service of a serious energy transition; to the contrary, to the extent that it props up the inferior current renewable technologies such as wind, solar, and biomass, it will retard serious efforts to develop breakthrough energy sources. 

The real “deniers” today are the climateers who refuse to consider that their case for catastrophe has weakened even as they promote unserious solutions that do little or nothing to stimulate the genuine energy transition they say they want. Their default position continues to be simpleminded exaggeration or distortion of every possible angle for political gain.

h/t American Power

I generally like John Oliver, but doesn't this sum up how desperate they are to support their position?  Was Galileo in the majority of scientific thought when he had his opinions? Although I suppose Galileo's trial may have been like that.

John Oliver spews a bunch of bullshit in the lead up of this video.  Global temperatures have not increased over the last fifteen years.  That is why the public is starting to get skeptical over "climate change" especially when government leaders are proposing spending trillions on this issue.  

Science does not operate from consensus votes.  It works with new ideas being proposed and often facing stiff resistance, until adopted.  I welcome debate and objective review on climate change. What I find frustrating is how the great proponents of global warming/climate change do not want to have that debate.