During Question Period the other day on CPAC, Stéphane Dion was attempting to trip up the Prime Minister on his Kyoto writings of some years ago. The Prime Minister’s defence was that Dion was misleading people by not admitting his own record.

Underlying both comments (click here to view) was the assumption that the science was proven and the only question was which party was going to adhere to the science.

Did I miss the memo? It seems to me that the science is anything but settled. Was there a conference in which the issue was discussed and settled through time-honoured peer review? Or, has political science become a basic science in which politicians are now qualified to make scientific conclusions? What about Bjorn Lomborg’s work (click here to view) on the futility of Kyoto?

Why, according to the Liberals, are those, including me, who question the assumptions of climate change, labelled “climate change deniers”? Those words are said with a vehemence that parallels Holocaust Deniers as if doubters on policy are equivalent to Ernst Zundel.

What happened to free speech, open debate, and public responsibility? Maybe that’s the problem with the whole issue – nobody’s allowed to question or discuss it. It’s just not politically correct.