Science, Climate and Policy

The most disturbing aspect of the climate change issue has been the attack on science. Science in its purest form is apolitical. Follow the evidence and let the chips fall where they may. But of course, science is done by people and people have biases. Certainly some questionable science has been done in ways to support a particular point of view. That said, science and the scientific method have brought us incredible discoveries and understandings of our world by mostly being unbiased.

When science uncovers something that suggests that changes should be made in policy and those changes could be expensive or inconvenient, the response has been to attack the science. It is not that the attackers are necessarily anti science in the bigger sense, they just don’t like this particular science because they are afraid of the implications. Don’t face up to the implications—kill the messenger.

 The basic science of climate change is not about the many remedies that might, or should be taken (that comes later) but is simply the facts as presently known from observation and experimentation. These facts, by their very nature, suggest solutions but it is not the role of science to dictate the solutions .  It is the responsibility of elected officials to consider the evidence, consult with science about the range of solutions and take action.

I would be much happier with the “climate deniers” if they would just be honest and say something like “Our best scientists have found that human activities, particularly burning fossil fuels, have resulted in the world’s climate warming faster than would be expected by natural processes. We have looked at the range of solutions and find that they are too expensive and too inconvenient for us to take action. We are counting on the people to find their own solutions and adapt to the changes as they occur”.

We can’t continue to reject science that reveals “inconvenient truth” because we then risk the perils of rejecting any science that reveals unpleasant consequences. That is a road we don’t want to travel.