At the start of a new year, let me mention some of my favorite posts of this blog.
Who to believe? (2009)
In this post I discussed the million dollar question for the lay public in this internet-age: How to gauge conflicting information on complex topics such as health or climate? Who do you trust? Some things to consider: Context, expertise, conspiracy theories, timescales, spatial scales, logic, likelihood, risk, motive, consistency, coherence, etc. (Also a Dutch version)
This post was in reply to a newspaper article about Fred Singer, where he made a host of untrue claims. The Dutch version was published as a column in a newsletter for environmental professionals.
Singers unfounded opinion about CO2 is not relevant for the discussion about energy options. About policy options, for example concerning energy, there will always be different opinions. And different opinions should be heard. But please leave out scientifically proven untruths.
And some more recent ones:
To what extent should scientists differentiate in their role as ‘pure’ scientists and their role as public educator, advocate, activist, or whatever other public role they may want to assume? With a medical analogy to illustrate the dynamics.
Of the random walk saga:
And this series of four addressing the interlinking issues of long timescales, big inertia and long term sustainability:
- What does population have to do with climate change? (with global maps scaled to different quantities)
- Where are we going? (idem, for future GDP)
Tags: climate blogging