AGW BELIEVERS VS SCIENTISTS

The one thing AGW believers and scientists whose findings reveal the Sun + make the climate change agree on, is "the science is not settled."
Because there has never been a thorough debate on this matter, here’s what needs to happen: The 30 some thousand scientists who’ve put their name on the line declaring their scientific findings are contraire to the ideology of say – an Al Gore, should be summoned to appear together and debate their points in front of our elected delegations; not Czars, the guys and gals we elect. Not one single solitary regulation or law should be made, until each scientist laid out their facts, and each AGW believer laid out their emotions.
The elected ones should then be required to take notes, ask fact based questions, not “how do you feel” questions, then sort through the entire debate and carefully remove all the emotion until only the facts are left standing.
Then the elected ones should review every pre-existing law and regulation, to see if there are any pre-existing in need of enforcing/activating before wasting our money making up a new law or regulation. If this research reveals need for a new law or regulation, they should use their respective state’s constitution and the U.S. Constitution, to ensure the prospective law or regulation doesn’t violate said constitutions.
The elected ones should also put to an end, this un-constitutional business of government agencies making law sans constitutional administrative procedures.
Lastly, it should be noted that “consensus” and a “vote” are two entirely different things. Consensus means general or widespread agreement, which essentially means nothing. It is used more often to propagandize something by one who is void of facts. Vote means a formal choice for or against something, which means a counted show of hands (so to speak).
I raise my hand in a vote to support said debate.
Roni