November 27, 2011

PROBABLY NOT HELPFUL...:

Why climategate is a catastrophe for science (Christopher Caldwell, 11/26/11, Financial Times)

Voters in a democracy do not argue about science. They argue about the authority of scientists. And scientists' claim to authority comes from the perception that, in fact, they do not let their vanities and rivalries influence their work. Where others pursue their grubby little self-interest, scientists pursue only the truth. The emails of 2009, however, showed that some prominent members of the climate-change establishment were not operating in a spirit of openness. Defending a scientist's furtiveness on the grounds that "his science is good" is like defending a politician's blunder on the grounds that he "did nothing illegal". The emails were damaging because they undermined the scientists' claim to be speaking as scientists rather than as interested parties.

If scientists are shown to be colluding to arrive at a given result, then the halo around science dissipates. Any voter who does not want to be duped must suspend his scepticism. He must listen to scientists with no more deference than he does any other interest group.

...that the very notion of scientists being able to arrive at results that are not shaped by their own biases is anti-scientific.

Posted by at November 27, 2011 1:44 PM
  

blog comments powered by Disqus
« THERE'S NO NEED TO ASK "WHAT WOULD REAGAN DO?"...: | Main | »