How can you discredit something that discredits itself.

It's opening statement that "You are being lied to" tars all scientists with the same brush. How does Durkin try to prove his case? He asks some scientists. But by his opening statement they are liars.

Welcome to a new phrase "Doing a Durkin".

T. Sett, I think we are being lied to by politicians and economists who almost universally promote continuous human expansion.

In the same way, I can see the possibility that we are being lied to about climate change, although we should refer to it as possibly being misled rather than lied to.

I believe that anthropogenic climate is real and of a huge magnitude. But I’m willing to accept that it might not be the case.

But I’m not willing to accept that continuous human expansion, ie; the constant promotion of economic growth, population growth and ever-more human activity and the ever-greater demand on our resource base and environment, is the right way forward, or that a large portion of politicians and economists know this perfectly well…and are thus lying to us.

THIS is the big lie. This is what we need to be concerned about far more-so than climate change.

I don’t think that Durkin has discredited himself. Obviously he is not including all scientists in his ‘lie’, only those who disagree with him.

And I think his approach of only seeking interviews on his side of the argument is fine. We all know the views on the other side. He didn't need to interview anyone to go that stuff.