Disunity yet again plus impolite scientists
A couple quick points. First, check out Joe Romm’s post on this recent Times article. Apparently most meteorologists neither have training in climate sc...
A couple quick points. First, check out Joe Romm’s post on this recent Times article. Apparently most meteorologists neither have training in climate sc...
I’ll respond yet again to Paul Newall at the Galilean Library. Paul asks: “What, then, is the difference between someone who seizes on doubts to d...
Let’s continue with Paul Newall’s great post at the Galilean Library. Paul writes that “if science has become so deeply specialised that even...
On Wednesday I went to a panel on science education at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. It was a fascinating exchange. To highlight ju...
Paul Newall of the Galilean Library has a great comment on doubt and disunity in science. He raises a particularly interesting point on expertise: If everyone ...
My recent philosophical musings along with Ben Hale’s suggestion that climate change conflicts can partially be explained in terms of philosophy has got m...
RickA graciously responded to my calling him a denier: I would like to avoid the term denier however. It should be reserved for people who do not believe that t...
Ben Hale writes that climate change deniers may not be ideologically driven and instead have “competing ontological and epistemological claims, as well as...
Joe Romm recently highlighted the large number of organizations that think man-made global warming is a danger. Romm apparently hopes to bolster the case for g...
You often hear individual scientists preaching about “how science works.” While I think outreach is generally a good thing, I am not sure we should...