The author, Chris Mooney, is a journalist who is most well-known for his book The Republican War on Science (2005). In the newspaper article, Mooney describes several possible sources of climate data, satellite data being one source. He also describes how different people can have different perspectives on global warming based on looking at data from one year vs. trends over years and decades. Mooney ultimately criticizes Cruz for cherry picking data points and misinterpreting the Physicist Carl Mears' conclusions from his satellite data. Mears, whose data Cruz has used to argue that humans are not causing global warming, has said this conclusion is incorrect.
A couple weeks ago, I had the thrill of attending Neil deGrasse Tyson's entertaining talk in San Francisco. Somehow, I managed to be the last person to ask him a question during Q and A. (OK, I climbed over a few people to exit my row and threw some punches.) My question: I just watched the Cosmos episode on global warming. How would you recommend applying what scientists are telling us in our day-to-day lives? In other words, can I make a significant impact with my own lifestyle changes? What kind of response should people like me - people who are not astrophysicists or climate scientists working on producing more data - do in response to what we know now?
Do you know what Neil - yes, we are now close friends - replied? He said, "Stay visible." He actually said that twice. Now, he was referring to how he would like me to continue standing while he answered another question, but Neil did admonish me to "Stay visible." These words have given me newfound direction in life.
Ultimately, Neil did not respond to specifics about personal behavior change. Instead, he focused on how important it is for the U.S.'s environmental policies to agree with emergent science. Our national policies should reflect a commitment to utilizing climate science to guide our actions in taking care of our planet.
"Emergent science" is not a single, recent data point. It is the general consensus of the scientific community today, based on multiple data sources, test re-test reliability, peer reviews and criticism. Understanding and using emergent science requires practicing science in our day-to-day lives. It means becoming scientists ourselves in how we interpret information and make decisions.
With the tv and radio shows Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey and Star Talk, Neil deGrasse Tyson is urging us all to be better scientists. He is making science fun and accessible so that science will become more tightly woven into our cultural fabric. This was the theme of NDT's talk a couple weeks ago. He showed how scientific inquiry has changed over time and in different cultures of the world, producing more and less innovation.
Neil deGrasse Tyson wants to make us all better scientists so that we can analyze arguments better to distinguish between facts, spin, and conflicts of interest. More importantly, as better scientists, we will be more prone to promote politicians who will utilize emergent science to create effective policies and innovate on issues like global warming. This is where our impact could be significant.
Personally, I would like to believe that global warming isn't happening. I would like to continue doing whatever I want at all times. Because I want to. And I can. It makes my life more comfortable and free than probably most humans ever in the history of humans. But I see the polluted air hanging over my house, and I can't remember the last time it really rained, and I know I should pay attention to the scientists.
I am left with the questions: Do we value science enough to urge our politicians to use it? Are we willing to become better scientists as more and more information is available to us? Could Fritz Heider's idea of the "naive scientist" from the 1950s be more true today than it used to be? Or, are Susan Fiske and Shelley Taylor still correct in defining us as "cognitive misers", creatures who won't think any more than they have to? To the degree that we are cognitive misers, will personal and community beliefs trump scientific inquiry in who we elect to create national policy?
No comments:
Post a Comment