The problem is there are three groups: climate deniers, climate alarmists, and climate realists. The first two are much louder than the third, so the debate quickly turns into an extremist yelling match full of misinformation in the public arena. Most people never settle into the minority middle ground of climate realist, because it can be difficult to muddle through the extremist views to get to the truth. And even if you do, the majority of people will just make it a point to tell you how wrong you are anyway.

This trichotomy is not really helpful.

Here's a more helpful one: people who actually have expertise and peer-reviewed publications, people who at least pay attention to the above, and everyone else.

Thank you for, perhaps unintentionally, proving my point.

> The problem is there are three groups: climate deniers, climate alarmists, and climate realists.

Unless these labels are ones that people apply to themselves, you're being pretty unhelpful by labeling people.

Sounds like this is about Michael Shellenberger, the long-time climate activist recently turned climate realist.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/shellenberger-on-behalf-of-en...

Here's a response for diversity of viewpoints: https://sciencefeedback.co/evaluation/article-by-michael-she...

Do you have a mirror? It's behind a paywall