The communists did this in the USSR, they treated people who didn't believe in the Socialst/communist ideals, sending them into drug treatments, in the name of mental health.
If the world cannot accept diverging points of view, then we have lost all freedom, and it's time to start the wars again, to regain our freedom.
BTW there is no such thing as a climate sceptic, nor a climate denier, no one denies that there is a climate, nor that it can change.
This kind of thinking is indicative that this is not a sciencetific debate, but rather a religious debate, and is no better than other religions - thou. shall believe or perish!!!
The only thing is, that there is a group of us, who have not yet seen any convincing data that supports the contention that Humans control the climate via CO2 (or even can control it), and thus CO2 is the only factor, of impotance. Particularly when we look at other research, where temperature maps with near perfect correlation to the energy output of the sun.
When you compare CO2 with temperature, then it's only in the last 30 years or so that the curves match.. Prior to that period, CO2 was lagging temperature by around 800 years, indicating that temperature drives CO2, and not the otherway around..
I'm an engineer, and I like to make up my own mind, and as yet, the AGW fanatics, have provided nothing to convince me, other than IT IS THE CASE!!!!!! I actually still believe that the case against AGW is the strongest.. But no one will provide facts to me, only highly manipulated data sets, like the infamous hockey stick, and simliar dataset, which ignore historical information - such as the little iceage/middle age warm period.
It would suit the debate, if when reports were publicised, that it included references to the research papers, which further more would give access to the raw data and methods, so that other people can verify the results, however, most of the data, and papers are restricted access - why, if it is so important ?