You have to admire Dyson's blunt honesty: If what he says were obviously wrong, he wouldn’t have achieved what he has. But Hansen has turned his science into i

You have to admire Dyson's blunt honesty: If what he says were obviously wrong, he wouldn’t have achieved what he has. But Hansen has turned his science into ideology. He’s a very persuasive fellow and has the air of knowing everything. He has all the credentials. I have none. I don’t have a Ph.D. He’s published hundreds of papers on climate. I haven’t. By the public standard he’s qualified to talk and I’m not. But I do because I think I’m right. I think I have a broad view of the subject, which Hansen does not. I think it’s true my career doesn’t depend on it, whereas his does. I never claim to be an expert on climate. I think it’s more a matter of judgement than knowledge. I especially love the point about Hansen's career hinging on his theory being borne out which seems to be a general issue with science which crosses over into the mainstream consciousness.