4 ms·

> Is it your impression that scientists should be considered the paramount experts on climate change policy questions Yes. We should listen to people who use

> Is it your impression that scientists should be considered the paramount experts on climate change policy questions Yes. We should listen to people who use evidence and reason to suggest the best course of action. We should listen to people who have spent decades of their lives studying this issue for relatively little reward other than trying to make the world better. We should NOT listen to semi-literate goobers who gained authority by being popular with simpletons they manipulated into voting for them, mostly through graft and trickery. Those people's opinions should be regarded as being equivalent in value to the opinion of your weird conspiracist uncle who helped vote them into power.

getnormality 9mo ago
So your belief is that scientists are the people of evidence, reason, and selfless dedication to goodness, while policy people who are not scientists are incompetent and despicable? I don't know. Is such a black and white group based worldview plausible? It's possible I guess, but I find it hard to believe?
- mapontosevenths 9mo ago
  Decisions made based on science are more effective than those based on politics in almost 100% of cases. Especially when the subject of those decisions itself is science (the climate). I wouldn't argue that all scientists are selfless that would be silly. I would argue that the average scientist is less selfish than the average politician, yes. Examine the motivations. Few people go into pure science seeking power or money. Most or all politicians do.
  - getnormality 9mo ago
    That brings us back to the original question: does the science tell us what to do? Or is it your contention that the scientists tell us what to do, and whatever scientists say about a decision is presumably the right way to make decisions based on science?
    - mapontosevenths 9mo ago
      It is reasonable to ask "how should the science guide our actions?" I'm open to suggestions on the subject. It is not reasonable to ask IF the science should guide our actions. They only alternative is madness.
      - getnormality 9mo ago
        On that question, here is an article I found helpful: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/sunscreen-for-the-planet/ https://worksinprogress.co/issue/sunscreen-for-the-planet/
        mapontosevenths 9mo ago
        If there is scientific consensus that this is worth trying, and that the risk/reward ratio works out then I'm in favor of it. Right now though, my own limited guess would be that the risk/reward doesn't justify it. The climate is a chaotic system which exemplifies the concept of sensitive dependence upon initial conditions. We could easily kill millions or even billions of people with a little "whoopsie". It might be better to wait until the alternative is worse than that potential cost. I would, of course, defer to a consensus of experts on the subject if such a thing exists. I am not one.

getnormality 9mo ago

So your belief is that scientists are the people of evidence, reason, and selfless dedication to goodness, while policy people who are not scientists are incompetent and despicable? I don't know. Is such a black and white group based worldview plausible? It's possible I guess, but I find it hard to believe?

mapontosevenths 9mo ago
Decisions made based on science are more effective than those based on politics in almost 100% of cases. Especially when the subject of those decisions itself is science (the climate). I wouldn't argue that all scientists are selfless that would be silly. I would argue that the average scientist is less selfish than the average politician, yes. Examine the motivations. Few people go into pure science seeking power or money. Most or all politicians do.
- getnormality 9mo ago
  That brings us back to the original question: does the science tell us what to do? Or is it your contention that the scientists tell us what to do, and whatever scientists say about a decision is presumably the right way to make decisions based on science?
  - mapontosevenths 9mo ago
    It is reasonable to ask "how should the science guide our actions?" I'm open to suggestions on the subject. It is not reasonable to ask IF the science should guide our actions. They only alternative is madness.
    - getnormality 9mo ago
      On that question, here is an article I found helpful: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/sunscreen-for-the-planet/ https://worksinprogress.co/issue/sunscreen-for-the-planet/
      - mapontosevenths 9mo ago
        If there is scientific consensus that this is worth trying, and that the risk/reward ratio works out then I'm in favor of it. Right now though, my own limited guess would be that the risk/reward doesn't justify it. The climate is a chaotic system which exemplifies the concept of sensitive dependence upon initial conditions. We could easily kill millions or even billions of people with a little "whoopsie". It might be better to wait until the alternative is worse than that potential cost. I would, of course, defer to a consensus of experts on the subject if such a thing exists. I am not one.