5 ms·

Politics. Science used to be about absolute data, testing, and facts. When science sold its soul to politics and power, it lost the confidence of the masses. By

Politics. Science used to be about absolute data, testing, and facts. When science sold its soul to politics and power, it lost the confidence of the masses. By sold I mean scientists holding back data (global warming), and manipulating data, (COVID), to support a specific political agenda. The best thing we can do is remove politics from science before it’s too late.

bioinformatics 6y ago
That's spot on. It's a self inflicted wound.
- yokaze 6y ago
  Except it is the American public which is suffering, not science.
dmarchand90 6y ago
Could you be more specific by what you mean by "holding back data" or "manipulating data".
- Agustus 6y ago
  Look at Mann’s email trove of behind the scenes discussion.
- solarwinds123 6y ago
  Look into the replication crisis
natmaka 6y ago
Politicians like having an "expert" advocating stuff they want. A scientist is the perfect "expert", as he appears, for most, as intrinsically expert and objective/neutral. Hence some scientists happen to recommend things (ways to solve a practical problem) and are used by some politicians (through mass-media) who promote those things (far various reasons), and silent counter-arguments from other scientists. Note: consultants also often act as such "excuses", forking a "report" recommending actions which were secretly planned before their mission began. Those scientists may shoot themselves in the foot by doing so if, as I believe, their job is to explain how things work (nothing more).
Fanch22 6y ago
> scientists holding back data (global warming) I spent ten hour a week, during 3 months (lookdown helped) parsing data for global warming as well as economic data for model like DICE and others. Which data was held back please? I would really like to know? I might have been fooled by the treasure trove of data publicly available. Is it that the atmosphere overall have the same average temperature[0]? Its not held back. Is it that the low troposphere warming is causing the artic circle to break more often? Nah, i still found the raw data too. What was really surprising to me about the climate change denial is that the most well-know of "solar forcing" was debunked by physics college students circa 2004, and that despite that (and the cycle ending a while ago) it is still the argument i found the most often. The better argument, low-troposhpere CO2 concentration have a low effect on radiation, i hav seen exactly twice. Without the corollary, a c02 surplus at the surface level take between 20 and 30 year to reach the hgh troposphere/low stratosphere, so every emission right now will have almost no effect until 2040. This data is not held back, and is discussed quite often too. Did i miss something important? [0] https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018JD028901 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/201...
refurb 6y ago
When was this magical time when science and politics not been intertwined?
getlawgdon 6y ago
Oh dear, no. No. We need science in politics than ever. We need science-based policy more than ever. The closest thing we have to a "science party" is the Green and it isn't enough. We need a culture of science and that includes a political SCIENCE.

bioinformatics 6y ago

That's spot on. It's a self inflicted wound.

yokaze 6y ago
Except it is the American public which is suffering, not science.

dmarchand90 6y ago

Could you be more specific by what you mean by "holding back data" or "manipulating data".

Agustus 6y ago
Look at Mann’s email trove of behind the scenes discussion.
solarwinds123 6y ago
Look into the replication crisis

natmaka 6y ago

Politicians like having an "expert" advocating stuff they want. A scientist is the perfect "expert", as he appears, for most, as intrinsically expert and objective/neutral. Hence some scientists happen to recommend things (ways to solve a practical problem) and are used by some politicians (through mass-media) who promote those things (far various reasons), and silent counter-arguments from other scientists. Note: consultants also often act as such "excuses", forking a "report" recommending actions which were secretly planned before their mission began. Those scientists may shoot themselves in the foot by doing so if, as I believe, their job is to explain how things work (nothing more).

Fanch22 6y ago

> scientists holding back data (global warming) I spent ten hour a week, during 3 months (lookdown helped) parsing data for global warming as well as economic data for model like DICE and others. Which data was held back please? I would really like to know? I might have been fooled by the treasure trove of data publicly available. Is it that the atmosphere overall have the same average temperature[0]? Its not held back. Is it that the low troposphere warming is causing the artic circle to break more often? Nah, i still found the raw data too. What was really surprising to me about the climate change denial is that the most well-know of "solar forcing" was debunked by physics college students circa 2004, and that despite that (and the cycle ending a while ago) it is still the argument i found the most often. The better argument, low-troposhpere CO2 concentration have a low effect on radiation, i hav seen exactly twice. Without the corollary, a c02 surplus at the surface level take between 20 and 30 year to reach the hgh troposphere/low stratosphere, so every emission right now will have almost no effect until 2040. This data is not held back, and is discussed quite often too. Did i miss something important? [0] https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018JD028901 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/201...

refurb 6y ago

When was this magical time when science and politics not been intertwined?

getlawgdon 6y ago

Oh dear, no. No. We need science in politics than ever. We need science-based policy more than ever. The closest thing we have to a "science party" is the Green and it isn't enough. We need a culture of science and that includes a political SCIENCE.