The Academy Strikes Back

Ah, here’s a letter worth reading: “Open Letter: Climate Change and the Integrity of Science” This link will take you to the “[f]ull text of an open letter from 255 members of the US National Academy of Sciences in defence of climate research.”

The letter also appears in Science if you have a subscription.

The commentary on is also worth a read.

The comment by co-signor Peter Gleick‘s summed it up for me:

“It is hard to get 255 members of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences to agree on pretty much anything, making the import of this letter even more substantial.”


Disagreement is the heart of science, so one of the constant refrains from the denier camp tells much about them: sound science. This means, I gather, nearly complete agreement, nearly absolute consensus. That’s why “sound science” isn’t. Science doesn’t work that way. Research doesn’t work that way. Thinking doesn’t work that way. So, people who want absolutes, consensus, and certainty puzzle and, more often than not, scare me.

I have never understood the appeal of certainty. Mistakes and uncertainties exist to spur more thinking. Certainty obviates thinking. {shudder}



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: