April 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

« Reasonable supposition | Main | As American as GSO »

Feb 26, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I can't believe I just read that post on Ed Cone's website. I expect a torrent of backlash from global warming fanatics against him as a result.


It raises the question of the role of scientists as political advocates. Assuming that they don't tweak data for political purposes, does a scientist have a responsibility to become an advocate when he thinks the data indicate something needs to change? One can argue that scientists should just present their data and their conclusions and then allow the political process to take its course. Arguing against that is the reality that some issues are so complex -- climate change is one -- that lay people are unlikely to grasp the issue with an understanding sufficient to permit reasonable political action.

Andrew Brod

When you're a fanatic, you think everyone else is one too.

David Wharton

Um, wow.


And so it begins...


C'mon Spag, it's settled science. Owl Gore told me so. He won a Nobel Peace Prize, didn't he?


Algore and Obama won a gold and silver medal-for going downhill faster than anyone in BC. Congrats


impeccable - "...using that word. I do not think it means what he thinks it means." ~ Inigo Montoya

The comments to this entry are closed.