Transterrestrial Musings  

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)
The Ombudsgod
Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett)
Joanne Jacobs

Site designed by

Powered by
Movable Type
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Let's Hope So | Main | They Must Be Worrying About The New Glacial Advance »

Dissension In The Ranks

Some climatologists are getting concerned that their scientific results have been hijacked by global warming evangelicals with an anti-growth agenda. It's about time.

Posted by Rand Simberg at December 21, 2006 10:17 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference this post from Transterrestrial Musings.


Not to start an argument, but I took a TOTALLY different message away from that article than you did, Rand.

From what I read, Vranes didn't say anything about climatology being hijacked by anti-growth people. Instead, he was saying that quite a few scientists are worried that, by tempering their uncertainty (in order to gain or keep a voice in the science community), their words are now being taken as gospel truths instead of uncertain projections about what MIGHT happen in the future.

He then went on to say that he thinks that policy making should be left to policy makers, and that they (policy makers) need to be given more credit for being able to weigh options than they are.

He basically said at the end "give the policy people the straight facts, and tell them how certain or uncertain your predictions are. Then let THEM make the policy, instead of trying to make policy by calling your predictions 'the only way'".

The commenter "bruce" is the one that brought up how people with an agenda hijacked the issue, and Vranes didn't agree or disagree with him.

Posted by John Breen III at December 21, 2006 11:55 AM

Sounds like buyer's remorse, alright. He talks about the monster the climate folks have created, and wonders if it was a good idea in light of how shaky their prediction models are. Well, it's too late now, dude. The eco-religionists have their tables handed down from on high and now will proceed to stomp the infidels. But at least Climate science will be very well funded for the next 20 years.

If you wish to visit the monster in person, check out these folks:

Posted by K at December 21, 2006 12:51 PM

It's not clear that emphasizing uncertainty will result in less strict policies. If there's the possibility of very bad outcomes (runaway methane release from clathrates, for example), then policymakers may prefer even stricter controls, out of prudence.

For just this reason, I am bemused by global warming deniers who point to uncertainty as a reason to not do anything.

Posted by Paul Dietz at December 27, 2006 08:58 AM

Post a comment

Email Address: