[Criminal Number 18F]

Fifteen years ago a friend observed that, "it is alarming that you can tell what someone thinks about global warming from his position on abortion or gun control." His point was, the latter two are political issues and are somewhat intractable to the scientific method; the first should be amenable to scientific enquiry. (And we need to be prepared to change our positions depending on what the science says. My personal understanding is that very few conclusions here have been demonstrated with scientific probability). It disturbs me that we have a lot of Saganic bombast and not a lot of scientific humility in the whole climate field...

My friend who said that is now a PhD in the social sciences and is known as a quant head, who is applying scientific rigour where it has previously been lacking. This is not always popular with his colleagues.... some of whom prefer what they call "advocacy science," which means the first word cloaked with the jargon of the second...

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[RightWhale]

now a PhD in the social sciences

Properly credentialed and certified as a sentient being. That means they have to listen.