Gavin Schmidt clearly had the tougher job, and knew he was going to be attacked from t=0 in a way that Roy Spencer never would be.
So this, from Gavin, was spot-on:
"I'm not interested in doing this because it's good TV.... I don't need to be arguing with people just to make good TV."Good TV, of course, is really all Stossel cares about. (And isn't his faux 'astonished-that-anyone-could-ever-disagree-with-me' schtick pretty old by now?)
Like I said, this is a very good example of why scientists routinely decline these kind of "debates" (quote-unquote). Stossel's biases were very, very clear, and the scientist who appears gets bombarded with a series of interrupting, staccato questions -- what about India? What about hurricanes? What about the economy?? -- that simply do not allow for reasoned discussion.
They're only about, as Gavin said, "good TV." And TV has (sadly) never had anything to do with the scientific debates of our time.