Never Trust a Scientist on Global Warming

[Vox Moi]

A recent survey by St. Leo University asks who is the trusted source on Climate Change.
http://polls.saintleo.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/SLU-Q-1-TABLE-Global-Climate-Change-National-Survey-Results_FINAL.pdf
-----------------------
Politicians?
Newscasters?
Scientists?
Utility Companies?
The correct answer is 'none of the above'.
----------------------------------------------
Scientists do not trust scientists. Ask them. What scientists trust is science. That's the whole idea.
The method of science rests on measurement, observation and replicable experimentation. It is the method that is trusted, not the person performing it.
Science is poorly understood, especially in America, where personality and celebrity is everything. The terms most commonly applied to science by the mainstream media are 'theory' and 'experiment'. These terms, used in isolation as they often are, are nearly pejorative and sometimes intentionally so. Any wacko can hatch a crazy theory. Any nut job can dream up a cockeyed experiment.
Even the poll above is part of the problem. Missing from the choices in the survey question about trusted sources on climate change is "Peer-reviewed scientific papers." Also missing: "measurements, observations and mathematical analysis."
I have the utmost respect for scientists like Niels Tyson and Carl Sagan and but their success is also a sad, tacit admission that in order to sell science to the masses, you need need the opposite of a scientist: you need a salesman.

[n2doc]

1. As a scientist, I disagree

Scientists also build reputations, based on their prior work. There are plenty that I trust, without having to replicate their work.

Sagan was a brilliant scientist way before he was a 'salesman'. And afterwards. Tyson also.