AAAS “What We Know” Report and Excellent Scientist Testimonial Videos

It’s been widely reported that the AAAS is attempting to deliver the news about climate in an organized way that matches with scientific ethics. Here’s the report, which is pretty much recommended reading for just about everybody.

(I also wish everybody would come to grips with the closing sections of the Copenhagen Diagnosis, but that’s old news.)

The AAAS report is accompanied by a fairly courageous stance that they are not going to let this drop until the press and the political sector show some semblance of realism. This is excellent news, that one shouldn’t sully with a “better late than never” sort of disgruntlement. They really are biting the hand that feeds them, and this is a very big deal.

Along with this push, a suite of excellent videos has been produced, with comments from Hayhoe, Alley, and other demonstrably non-left-leaning scientists.

Everyone has their own voice, but there is a concerted effort to get beyond the word “belief”. This is an interesting strategy, and one which I for one believe, er, agree, is appropriate and justified.

Comments:

  1. The videos are at least as good as the excellent campaigns that haven't worked here in the UK. In creating these convincing programs, how many people were consulted who have doubts? Eventually you folks are going to have to bite the bullet and seriously ask sceptics what they would need to be convinced. It would require real debate and an open mind towards the answers you get.

    Alternatively I wish you the same success as every other campaign that leads with 'the scientists say'.

  2. I don't think committed skeptics will be won over by anything short of actual catastrophe. Fortunately, there aren't many of y'all and you don't know what you are talking about. Unfortunately, neither you nor the press understands that. The underlying question is how society can distinguish between science and bullshit. The purveyors of the bullshit will themselves never be able to help very much.

    This is not to say that we should avoid answering skeptics altogether, any more than we should avoid answering over-the-top alarmists.

    But look, some people think we're dying of contrails. They have a whole complex ideology built up, and have convinced themselves to the point that anyone talking sense is considered part of the contrail ("chemtrail") conspiracy. Should these people get on the front page of the newspaper? What about the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

  3. Well said, Michael - except that I disagree with that first sentence "I don’t think committed skeptics will be won over by anything short of actual catastrophe." I think committed skeptics will not be won over by anything - including actual catastrophe. Rather reminds me of my late father-in-law (sociopathic narcissist that he was) who denied he had prostate cancer until the day it killed him.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.