4 ms·

If it is done by experts in good faith this will probably be a good thing to strengthen the signal/noise ratio in climate science.

• GVIrish 9y ago
  Except all of Scott Pruitt's actions to date indicate that it is not being done in good faith.
• klipt 9y ago
  Pruitt is bought by the fossil fuel industry: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/22/oklahoma-attorney-generals-office-releases-7500-pages-of-emails-between-scott-pruitt-and-fossil-fuel-industry/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/20...
• dragonwriter 9y ago
  > If it is done by experts in good faith this will probably be a good thing to strengthen the signal/noise ratio in climate science. “Aye, and”—to quote Scotty—“if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.” It's not like Pruitt and his boss haven't already staked out a definitive position on climate science, or like Pruitt would structure (or his boss would tolerate him structuring) this in any way not assured to support that position.
• Avshalom 9y ago
  It will not. We've already done this http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-... It didn't help.
  • rndmize 9y ago
    Yep. I remember conservatives crowing about how this was a study by a climate skeptic and respected scientist and they'd be willing to accept the results. Of course, when the results weren't what they wanted, They turned against the whole thing. Brings to mind Gingrich and his "Mueller is an excellent pick" tweet a few months ago, only to completely flip his position a few weeks ago. These people are unredeemable.