The role of scientists is not limited to pure science. There are
social and ethical responsibilities.
Of course an astronomer discovering an asteroid intersecting the
earth's trajectory should not limit herself to publishing that result
in a long table in an obscure journal, even though that is sufficient
for it to be considered a scientific result.
Such a scientist has an ethical obligation extrinsic to the pure
science process but intrinsic to the social context of science to
inform the public of the real world implication of her work.
The optimal rate of change of climate is quite clearly at or near
enough zero, so the accelerating forcing of the present day is without
any doubt a serious problem because it exceeds the adaptation rates of
increasing numbers of subsystems. Whether there is an "optimal"
climate is entirely beside the point.
One may argue that the optimum position of a vehicle is at its
destination, but that does not imply that the optimum velocity of the
vehicle down the road is the fastest it is capable of. When you are
already traveling far faster than the posted safe speed, any assertion
that arguing for slowing down is "arrogance" is divorced from reality.
>From a NASA administrator, such a statement is not just wrong, it's crazy.
mt
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
