Here, there are 2 sides arguing. One claims the other is advocating destroying the environment, the other claims the former is manufacturing fake crisis.<p>Either none has proven their right (or were not effective enough that the other side can’t manipulate the truth), but to me, one argument has more permanent and damaging consequences than the other if it were true.<p>So how much skin in the game do climate change deniers have? What are they willing to indemnify the world if they turn out to be wrong since this is a planetary issue, not a national issue?<p>Right now we’re just making bets no?