Two opinion pieces. Or three, if you count James. But that’s four if you count me. Oh hang on, I’ll come in again. [Stoat] bit.ly/143SXc6 - Ah, enough science (or at least computation) what about the advocacy then? Talking about advocacy is great, you don’t have to have a clue about anything factual, its all so meta. JA, as usual has a nice thoughtful post which you should read. I’ll just throw in some… some what? Well, some words. Oh, all right then, some flames. Yes, we could change. So why don’t we? From P3 (but the original is here). Aiee, we hates it forever Baggins, yes we does. Why? Because its a piece that displays the very flaws it decries in others. It asks for many things to be fixed, but (paraphrasing) its asking for a much more thoughtful approach. At least, that’s how I interpret the complaint Too often, we reduce “news” to nuggets that feed prejudice and agenda… we need a firm grip on global realities. That requires professional reporters along with thoughtful readers who absorb what they report. Today’s avalanche of “news” from multiple directions would be great if we knew what to trust. Mostly, it only confuses us. Good stuff gets lost in a tower of babble. I agree with that: we do indeed need more thoughtful reporting. We need to concentrate more on the important things, not the trivia. So why on earth does he then blather on in a terribly confused manner about Farfetched? Orwell wrote “1984″ on the Scottish island of Jura. Just recently, the BBC reported, Jura vanished from view. Google inexplicably wiped it off the map. This was later corrected, but the point was made. When virtual replaces real, anything is possible. So much of it is bad, confused, un-thought-through. It reads like some old newspaper guy decrying the evils of a new world he doesn’t really understand. About the only bit really worth reading is a quote (or so he says. I can’t find it. But whether it is or not, the words are good) from Alexis de Tocqueville: When citizens grow apathetic, he wrote, democracies slide toward “soft despotism,” and majorities tyrannize minorities. The key here is “when citizens grow apathetic”. And that’s what we have. So its no good whinging about Second, we have to elect people who remember their oaths of office or any of that kind of stuff, when your core problem is your citizens. Who would rather sit in from on the TV eating popcorn and watching drivel than thinking (I’m referring to Joe Public here of course, not my readers). If your citizens won’t hold your Pols to account; if they continue to elect on party affiliation regardless of quality; then you get rubbish Pols. Oh, look… Climate scientists must not advocate particular policies Oh, don’t be silly (yes, I’ve redacted a somewhat stronger comment). Or, more politely, what James said. Oh go on then I’ll expand a bit. Prompted by Science and policy. * advocacy by climate scientists has damaged trust in the science – nah, this is nonsense. Trust has been damaged by the septic / denialist political-industrial complex, driven and abetted by individuals desire not to know certain true things, and various established organisations that have an interest in people not knowing those things. And trust has been damaged in two ways: in order to deny true things, they’ve had to deny / distort / hide / distract the science; and they’ve also deliberately set out to attack individuals when they couldn’t attack the science. * much climate scepticism is driven by a belief that environmental activism has influenced how scientists gather and interpret evidence – again, nonsense. But this time she has just confused cause and effect. Septics will happily pick up the ready-made excuse “oh, your activism affects your data” whenever they encounter data they don’t like. But the fundamental belief is “not-GW” (which is why “denialist” is indeed a good term; these people don’t have a coherent position; they just deny the coherent scientific position). * They call me an “honest broker” – ROTFL. Can I stop now? Update: JA has a nice comment: “Indeed, by strongly advocating her own preferred policy, she is following the precise path that she wishes to deny others.” Make that five Did I mention that Warren Pearce is a bozo? Too hot for you? You can read some more reasoned views at Wotts Up With That Blog. - #science #sciencenews #sciencearticle #article
Posted on: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:53:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015