Judith Curry: ‘Let’s abandon the scientific consensus-seeking approach in favour of open debate’

Judith Curry writes in the Australian:

SCIENTISTS do not need to be consensual to be authoritative. Authority rests in the credibility of the arguments, which must include explicit reflection on uncertainties, ambiguities and areas of ignorance, and more openness for dissent. The role of scientists should not be to develop political will to act by hiding or simplifying the uncertainties, explicitly or implicitly, behind a negotiated consensus. I have recommended that the scientific consensus-seeking process be abandoned in favour of a more traditional review that presents arguments for and against, discusses the uncertainties, and speculates on the known and unknown unknowns. I think such a process would support scientific progress far better and be more useful for policymakers.

The growing implications of the messy wickedness of the climate-change problem are becoming increasingly apparent, highlighting the inadequacies of the “consensus to power” approach for decision-making on such complex issues.

Let’s abandon the scientific consensus-seeking approach in favour of open debate and discussion of a broad range of policy options that stimulate local and regional solutions to the multifaceted and interrelated issues surrounding climate change.

Read more…

5 thoughts on “Judith Curry: ‘Let’s abandon the scientific consensus-seeking approach in favour of open debate’”

  1. Unfortunately, “local and regional” is exactly what they’re trying to destroy. They have to convince people that what other regions do affects them to get support for centralized control. It’s just a broader version of the “property value” argument used by people who think they should have the right to tell the neighbors what color to paint their house.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.