I can't help directly. But it seems to me that there's a requirement missing from your request. The missing requirement is the _purpose_ of the forum. Is it scientific, in which case, scientists are allowed to be what they normally are: skeptical of everything? Is it political, in which case, the best participants will be popularizers or public intellectuals? Is it social, in which case, there's a need for science/policy crossovers?
I think filling that missing link will lead to a more effective choice of the "doubter" you seek. On 09/21/2015 10:35 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:
In the meantime, could you possibly help me with the following. Clark University is proposing a forum on climate change. I want that forum to be honest, so I am wondering if anybody in this group can propose me the names of some skeptics who are sober, thoughtful, and have not resorted to throwing snowballs in the senate, so I could propose those names to the convening committee. My thought was that in a forum on climate change, which would include, of course, many sessions on consequences and remediation, should be at least one in which the whole consensus is put in doubt.
-- ⇔ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
