3 ms·
It's common sense, no? Who do you think will get more grants, the "we're definitely all gonna die of heat, drought, and hurricanes" group, or "there is 40% prob
by 0xbear 9y ago
It's common sense, no? Who do you think will get more grants, the "we're definitely all gonna die of heat, drought, and hurricanes" group, or "there is 40% probability that the temperature might rise by 1C in a hundred years" group? For the record, the latter hypothesis is made up to illustrate the point, but the former is in wide circulation.
- yongjik 9y agoYou seem to have this weird notion that NSF and friends weigh grant proposals based on clickbaity-ness of the titles. Have you ever read a grant proposal?
- 0xbear 9y agoAnd you seem to have this weird notion that whether or not a team has a high profile does not impact its chances of getting a grant. In the absence of a feedback loop this largely turns into a popularity contest, and dire predictions are helpful to that end. All I'm proposing is to create a stronger feedback loop. I don't see why anyone, including the scientists, would be against that.
- yongjik 9y agoA scientist becomes "high profile" by writing many papers that are highly regarded by fellow scientists, not by being quoted by CNN. If anything, unless you are already a highly respected scholar, being frequently quoted by mainstream media has traditionally had negative consequences for your career. Google "sagan effect".
- pavlov 9y agoWhat does wide circulation mean? Is there an IPCC report that makes the claim that "we're definitely all gonna die of heat, drought, and hurricanes"?