3 ms·
I never found that argument convincing either. What I do find convincing are the basic physics (CO2 absorbs more UV) coupled with actual physical evidence of ef
by api 7y ago
I never found that argument convincing either. What I do find convincing are the basic physics (CO2 absorbs more UV) coupled with actual physical evidence of effects in the real world.
- yters 7y agoIn which case, scientists should focus on making the science abundantly clear, as well as addressing the numerous objections people have at the science level. It seems like they want to avoid the hard work of following Sagan's advice, and would rather appeal to authority.
- jbay808 7y agoAren't there now a large number of people who have invested tons of time doing exactly that? For example the people who run realclimate.org?
- api 7y agoI sort of agree. In my experience scientists who are also good communicators are rare. Sometimes it's a personality thing but it's also a time thing. Most scientists don't have time to talk about science. They're too busy doing it (and grant writing, and grant writing, and grant writing, and teaching, and grant writing, and grant writing, and ...).