Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
1–10 of 16 posts
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#2In case anyone questions why the HN title is different from the NYT title, I adapted it from the subhead which reads as follows: "Grudgingly, many climate scientists are beginning to engage critics, admit mistakes and open up their data."
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#3"“We have to do a better job of explaining that there is always more to learn, always uncertainties to be addressed,” said John P. Holdren, an environmental scientist and the White House science adviser. “But we also need to remind people that the occasions where a large consensus is overturned by a scientific heretic are very, very rare.”"
That is a... curious word choice for the White House science adviser.
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#4Definitely a good thing if they start opening up more and start engaging with skeptics in debates instead of just appealing to authority.
But the true reason no one will believe their claims till it's too late is that they have no good solutions other than pushing us to the dark ages in terms of energy consumption.
IMO climate scientists should also start thinking about solutions to the climate problem (even if its not exactly their field). We could definitely use more people thinking about solutions rather than just describing the problem or its extent.
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#5Definitely a good thing if they start opening up more and start engaging with skeptics in debates instead of just appealing to authority. But the true reason no one will believe their claims till it's too late is that they have no good solutions other than pushing us to the dark ages in terms of energy consumption. IMO climate scientists should also start thinking about solutions to the climate problem (even if its n…
> But the true reason no one will believe their claims till it's too late is that they have no good solutions other than pushing us to the dark ages in terms of energy consumption.
That may be true of some environmentalists, but certainly not all. For instance, a much greater number now support building new nuclear plants, as a lesser evil when compared to oil and coal.
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#6Definitely a good thing if they start opening up more and start engaging with skeptics in debates instead of just appealing to authority. But the true reason no one will believe their claims till it's too late is that they have no good solutions other than pushing us to the dark ages in terms of energy consumption. IMO climate scientists should also start thinking about solutions to the climate problem (even if its n…
> But the true reason no one will believe their claims till it's too late is that they have no good solutions other than pushing us to the dark ages in terms of energy consumption. That may be true of some environmentalists, but certainly not all. For instance, a much greater number now support building new nuclear plants, as a lesser evil when compared to oil and coal.
My opinion is that nuclear is a non-starter due to the weight of regulations surrounding it and its capital intensive nature. We need to see radical game-changers which cannot happen in such an environment.
The recent news on the Bloom boxes has me quite hopeful however.
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#7Is there a non-editorial reason that a new title had to be submitted for this article? The original title:
"Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate"
is more succinct, and carries a different connotation than the one invented by retro:
"Climate scientists beginning to admit mistakes and open up their data."
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But the true reason no one will believe their claims till it's too late is that they have no good solutions other than pushing us to the dark ages in terms of energy consumption. That may be true of some environmentalists, but certainly not all. For instance, a much greater number now support building new nuclear plants, as a lesser evil when compared to oil and coal.
My opinion is that nuclear is a non-starter due to the weight of regulations surrounding it and its capital intensive nature. We need to see radical game-changers which cannot happen in such an environment. The recent news on the Bloom boxes has me quite hopeful however.
The Bloom boxes are nothing more than more efficient natural gas powered generators. If anyone truly believed that anthropogenic CO2 will cause catastrophic climate change in the 21st century they would not be looking toward Bloom boxes as a meaningful solution to that problem.
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#9"“We have to do a better job of explaining that there is always more to learn, always uncertainties to be addressed,” said John P. Holdren, an environmental scientist and the White House science adviser. “But we also need to remind people that the occasions where a large consensus is overturned by a scientific heretic are very, very rare.”" That is a... curious word choice for the White House science adviser.
Could you explain what you mean? I don't understand your subtext.
Re: Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate
#10Definitely a good thing if they start opening up more and start engaging with skeptics in debates instead of just appealing to authority. But the true reason no one will believe their claims till it's too late is that they have no good solutions other than pushing us to the dark ages in terms of energy consumption. IMO climate scientists should also start thinking about solutions to the climate problem (even if its n…
IMO you should read more widely about solutions to the climate problem. There are plenty out there for energy production: solar, geothermal and tidal, as well as measures like energy efficiency or soil improvement, but apparently little political will to see anything actually done, or to put significant amounts of investment in.