So What Should We Do?

In the climate change debate, both sides have an incentive to scientize – to argue about the science rather than the resulting value/political/policy propositions. Those who advocate greenhouse gas reductions believe that the science is clear and compels a particular policy response. Those who oppose greenhouse gas reductions have found great success by arguing over …

Continue reading ‘So What Should We Do?’ »

Thinking Well About Climate

I’ve said before that Kelly Redmond is something of a national treasure. This interview by Kit Stolz is a good reminder of why. In an age of scientific generalization, Kelly, deputy director of the Western Regional Climate Center, is the quintessential generalist in a couple of different ways. First, he’s conversant with all the key …

Continue reading ‘Thinking Well About Climate’ »

Consensus Science

I have tried several times, with varying degrees of success, to tackle the “consensus ain’t science” shibboleth. (See especially here and the comments here). Andrew Dessler recently took an excellent stab at this in a couple of posts: see here and here. Might a “consensus” position be wrong? Of course. All knowledge is provisional and …

Continue reading ‘Consensus Science’ »