There's some negative feedback associated with that strategy.
One of the major reasons people voraciously deny (manmade) global warming is because they see so much irrationality coming from certain people trying to convince them of the problem. It comes across as dishonest and desperate, which is not really a good way to convince people.
What we really need is calm, clear science being described by actual scientists (rather than politically controversial figures). We need clear delineation of risks and costs associated with mitigation strategies, not mass panic.
One of the major reasons people voraciously deny (manmade) global warming is because they see so much irrationality coming from certain people trying to convince them of the problem. It comes across as dishonest and desperate, which is not really a good way to convince people.
What we really need is calm, clear science being described by actual scientists (rather than politically controversial figures). We need clear delineation of risks and costs associated with mitigation strategies, not mass panic.