Climate debate eternity

Ronald Bailey points to a new site, Climate Debate Daily. I dislike the site already. Its two-column format ("calls to action" vs "dissenting voices") seems designed to perpetuate polarized debate rather than ever breaking new ground or convincing anybody of anything. Which column would I go into if (as is the case) I think that global warming carries serious risks, which are sometimes overstated, and that certain measures to reduce those risks -- particularly, a carbon tax -- should be implemented for multiple reasons, including ones unrelated to global warming?