An Open Letter to the Climate Scientist Community

Dear Climate Scientists:

Hi, it’s us, the public who are trying to understand what’s going on with the climate and how important it really is.?We hate to admit it, but we’re just so gosh-darn confused about what’s really happening.?Most of us think something important is going on and that we need to pay attention to it, and we’re even willing to pay cold, hard cash to fix it once we know what it is we’re fixing.?But here’s the thing:??we just don’t know, and we especially don’t know who’s telling us the truth.?We’re caught smack-dab between the screamers and the ear-pluggers, which is an unsavory place to be.?If we turn one way we’re yelled at, and if we turn the other way we’re laughed at.?And everyone's throwing soup at Rembrandts! Help!

Here's what we think we understand.?Global temperatures are rising, and manmade CO2 is the culprit.?When we mention that CO2 is natural and has been here since there’s been earth - and has risen and fallen during that time - we’re told “well that was before us, now it’s different.”?When we read the IPCC report about that causal link, it tells us that our old computer models match past observations, but the only way those models match today’s observations is if we blame that difference on manmade emissions; if we do that, then everything’s hunky-dory.?That kinda sounds like we think our models are right and nature is wrong, which is a real head-scratcher because we thought that models were supposed to capture nature instead of vice-versa. Not the most ringing endorsement of scientific certainty, is it? We get that you believe it, but if you told us the opposite tomorrow then we wouldn't be too surprised. Ah well, you’re the scientists.

And hey, since we brought it up, can we talk about those dang models??We know we need ‘em, we know that you measure stuff then plug those measurements into the models - along with hundreds of made up assumptions - to try and see how things might/potentially/could happen in the future.?Heck, some of us professor-types even build our own models to describe businesses we’re starting and money we could be making.?When no one’s looking, sometimes we even admit that all models are wrong, but some are useful to each other, because they’re really just guesses about the future.?But then:

Imagine our confusion when we read that out of 1184 climate scenarios that were modeled – forgetting the millions of potential scenarios that weren't – the most distrastrous one was chosen as The Truth.?

Wait, was there some big climate vote that we all missed??Since they’re all guesses anyway, we wish we'd had some say in what The Truth became.?But then again, y’all are the scientists, and we hope you’re voting the right way.?Consensus, and what-not.

Maybe the most confusing part of this whole climate thing is that what we hear from people and what they do about it are often very different things.?Sir AlGore made those two Inconvenient movies that told us the debate is over, but gosh-darn it, in all my 23 years of working on the climate I haven’t been invited to even one debate.?Feels like I totally missed out. People say they want transparency and the truth, but when I raise my hand to ask questions they yell at me.?Leo DiCaprio made that Don’t Look Up movie and told us climate death is as obvious as a comet hurtling towards earth, but then gassed up his yacht with 350,000 gallons of petrol. President Biden looked into the camera and told us that climate change is an existential crisis, then flew Air Force One to Paris for a 20-limo motorcade, then onto Glasgow to stare at more cameras to tell us to stop using gas. Sir Richard Attenborough made a movie telling us all to quit flying - after he flew around the world 23 times. Hey, no fair! Heck, even some of you scientists tell us that climate change is a 9 out of 10 on the crisis scale, yet no one is quitting their jobs, selling their stuff and moving up to Pike’s Peak.?Now, I know we aren’t the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree, but when someone tells us it’s an emergency we expect to see an ambulance or two.?How come no one’s driving to the emergency room? How come no one’s giving up the stuff they say is killing us??

Look, we get it, that new Tesla sure is shiny and those rooftop solar panels sure let our neighbors know we’re Climate Woke Folk.?But we’re having a hard time saying stuff like “climate justice” when it seems like what poor, colored people need most are food, shelter, healthcare and jobs.?Or maybe that EV charging station dispenses mental health care on the side??Cuz that would be really cool.

Maybe we sound all preachy here, but we need you scientists more than ever.?Really.?We need you scientists to prove stuff so we don’t have to read about debates that none of us are invited to and votes we never cast.?I’ve never once had a disagreement about the existence of gravity, and maybe it’s because it can be proven all over the world for as long as we can remember.?Gravity doesn't suffer from a replication crisis like climate science does, so maybe if we spent more time on stuff we can prove instead of on models we guess at that would be helpful. Just a thought.?Maybe all that attribution/blame science you’re feeding to lawyers so they can sue oil companies just feeds the Big Climate Shame Machine, and for sure it confuses the heck out of us.?We don’t like too-fat horses and too-small pigs either, but blaming them on fossil fuels with - ahem, science - sure feels funny.?We know y’all have lots of letters following your names, so help us non-Phuff’D people understand physics.?With proof, please.

The late Dr. Stephen Schneider, Sir Gore’s Nobel Prize winning climate scientist, helped us better understand climate science and brought it to the forefront of our public discussion.?For that he deserves our gratitude.?He also commercialized the scientific double-ethical-bind concept, where even if climate science differed from opinions about that science, it was OK to exaggerate things in order to push us all in the direction he wanted.?Facts can be negotiated, as long as we're moving minds. Sir AlGore jumped all over that idea too, of course, and has been very open about exaggerating his Inconvenient claims because, you know, his cause is noble.

Sorry, folks, this is where we have to say gotcha.?

Corruption for a noble cause is still corruption.?You don't get to lie just because you think your cause is just.

Dr. Roger Pielke, a climate scientist and long-time advocate for scientific integrity, has been constantly under fire for calling out noble cause corruption. In a recent webinar, he explained the criticism he most often receives from his scientific colleagues: "you may be telling the truth, but it's not helpful."

Au contraire, Dr Pielke!

We want the truth because it is helpful. We need science that proves stuff, now more than ever.

As Dr. Schneider once said:?“they want me to prove it.?Of course I can’t prove it.”?Actually, we needed that exact thing.?Climate scientists, we need you to prove it.?We need you to get rid of this double-ethical-bind.?We need you to call it out. We need you to prove stuff with science so that we don’t need to care about opinions.

Thank you.

Signed,

The American Climate (and tax-paying) Public