To the editor

In 1989 the late Dr. Stephen Schneider expressed what he called a “dilemma” facing climate scientists. As scientists, Schneider said, they are bound to the scientific method, promising to tell the whole truth and nothing but. But as human beings desiring a better world, he concluded that they might have to fudge on the scientific method, be ready to distort the truth a bit to alarm and motivate the public to embrace the challenge of what we now call climate change.

Schneider’s noble lie rationale caught on with some of his fellow climate scientists and remains with us to this day. A recent example is the ridiculous claim that in early July the earth registered its hottest days in recorded history, the hottest in at least 122,000 years according to one scientist. In order to validate this claim, of course, we would have to know the daily temperature readings of the entire planet for a long, long time. This data we simply do not have. What, for example, was the earth’s temperature on Aug. 8, 1523? Or June 27, 14 BC? No one knows.
Arguably, we have data of this sort for the last 40 or so years, since satellites began measuring temperature across the entire planet. But, claiming we hit the hottest day in 40 years is not all that alarming. Consequently, some scientists fudged the truth, and a compliant or complicit media ran with this baseless claim.
The downside of twaddle like this, which has reached epidemic levels, is obvious. Survey after survey indicates that trust in our institutions has declined precipitously since the middle of the last century. We no longer believe what the scientists and journalists tell us. But then why would we? When they abandoned their professional charters to inform and made persuasion their goal, the erosion of trust was inevitable. Regaining it will be difficult. But returning to their true calling as scientists and journalists, which entails abandoning Dr. Schneider’s advice, would be a very good place to start.

Ed Mertz
Prescott