Thread by @AlexEpstein

If you want to see how my humanistic approach to energy/climate compares to the approach of prestigious climate catastrophists, watch the just-released "Opposing Views" by @MikhailaAleksis, which features me vs. Dr. Andrew Dessler.

It's changing minds!👇

"I was expecting Alex Epstein to be an idiot, but to me he clearly comes out as the winner. I guess I'm moving away from the 'save the planet people'"

"Dr. Dessler has many political comments, but little scientific comments. Some of his scientific comments are debatable. I believe Mr. Epstein had a more cogent set of arguments."

"IMO Alex Epstein was very convincing as he was open to debate and considered human existence in the equation. Surprisingly as a scientist, Andrew Dessler used emotion, weasel words..."

"I was engaged far more with Epstein. Its clear that Dr. Dessler has rehearsed a lot of his talking points and didn't give anything solid. Just a general foreboding that bad things will happen in the future *spooky noises*."

"Epstein on the other hand was pretty straight with saying that human practicality needs to come first and that with everything in life there are tradeoffs, and these tradeoffs seem to me to be perfectly acceptable."

"How many people just watched the first guy because he brought intelligently articulated things you never hear to the table? That was refreshing and thought-provoking, Mikhaila."

"I greatly appreciated Epstein's advocacy for nuclear energy....I also greatly appreciated Epstein's insistence that the effect on human needs is priority consideration."

"I found Dessler to be a stark contrast in terms of making a good faith argument. I found numerous instances of his arguments where I wondered if he was ignorant or disingenuous."

Looking at the YouTube comments so far, while many minds have been influenced in my humanist direction, no one's mind seems to have been influenced in Dr. Andrew Dessler's catastrophist direction. Just a few already-catastrophists voicing their support.