tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14072474.post1703313622988823704..comments2023-11-03T06:36:27.305-04:00Comments on Phronesisaical: Mooney's Reporthelmuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09069600766378586919noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14072474.post-39554897318574039622010-07-02T14:18:37.900-04:002010-07-02T14:18:37.900-04:00Personally, I think scientists need to be better a...Personally, I think scientists need to be better about conveying uncertainty and putting judgments into context. While your "discoverable truths" argument is technically correct, in reality science rarely delivers unambiguous truth.<br /><br />You can look at the science related to human health or climate change for a host of examples. <br /><br />Scientific credibility is damaged when one day the public hears that X is bad for you and the next day they hear that X is good for you (or maybe not so bad after all). Some of this isn't necessarily the fault of science since the media too often highlight single studies without providing much in the way of broader context. But sometimes scientific conclusions turn out to be ambiguous or just plain wrong.<br /><br />Similarly, the public becomes confused when the Al Gores and Inhofe's enter the fray with their exaggerations and downright falsehoods. Worryingly, climate science has descended into tribalism where credibility depends on litmus tests and heresy isn't tolerated. The public sees these battles and the credibility of science and scientists suffers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com