The Editor of one of the largest scientific journals around launched a completely typical attack on Global Warming "deniers", of the sort you can see in any mainstream media any day of the week, right along with the now de rigeur Sarah Palin hate.

Just one problem-- his audience is scientists.  REAL ones.

One of the key elements to sound science is "scepticism"...the Scientific Method in a nutshell:  You see something cool, like how when water freezes into ice it floats on water.  Everything else in the world gets denser when it goes from liquid to solid, but not water(!)

So you think, Why--??-- and you play with it a bit, and tell yourself a story (called a hypothesis, "under/less than a thesis", that's important) about why it might be the way it is.

Then, you try your hardest to bust your own story, and you invite others to try to as well.  If it gets busted, fine; you turf that hypothesis and make up another one based on what you've learned.  Try to bust the new one.  If a story finally can't be busted you call it a Theory-- and keep on testing it too.

"Science"-- real science-- is 99% a system of disbelief.  The 1% that makes it through all that rigour is trustable.  Not so much "believable" or an item of faith at all, just trustable, like a sturdy tool; something you can work with to find out more.  And if a theory gets busted, like Einstein (partially) did to Newton, then no one gets mad, they get happy(!) and set to testing the brand new stuff.  To them it's like a box of new toys.

So, you tell a bunch of scientists that "the debate is over" on AGW implying "we know everything now"-- and they're going to beat you up.  Scientists don't think that way, don't live that way, and they have no tolerance at all for it.  They aren't going for ratings or votes.  They aren't trying to sell anybody stuff or get elected.  They're trying to FIND OUT.

(Note:  All that ^^^ assumes "a perfect world"... there are egos, there are competitions for funds... but it's a lot more sincere than politics.)

So this Editor got beaucoup negative reactions for his completely fashionable and unscientific attitude, and if you read the comments, even the ones who agree with him that CO2 is a threat to be coped with just didn't appreciate his huckster attitude in a scientific journal.

Yes, a lot of them don't think AGW is a big deal.  That's good.  But it's a lot better that scientists are finally in an uproar about the presentation of this AGW barely-even-hypothesis that's nowhere NEAR tested enough to warrant largescale economic wreckage.  Especially in view of all the testing it's been failing lately... but never mind that for now.

[Oh, here's your "two sentences"; skip all that and read:] The important thing here by far is that scientists are reclaiming Science and refusing to be spoken for by political hack pitchmen.  They're insisting upon
recovering their Method and advertising their contempt for insults passed
off as Science.

As it should be.  Finally.  Makes me happy.  Hope it's a trend.

—Ron Copis