Hacker News Reader

This presupposes that scientists are the reason that "not left-wing" people (in reality a small fraction of US conservatives) aren't listening to scientists. The fact that climate change is human caused is political in the states, should that, too, be left out of the IPCC report to make it more palatable?

View on HN

> This presupposes that scientists are the reason that "not left-wing" people (in reality a small fraction of US conservatives) aren't listening to scientists

No it doesn't. My argument is that if the scientists start bringing more politics into this, they make the political situation even worse than it is now, and they give people even more reasons to resist listening.

So where's the line? How much scientific evidence must we suppress to avoid offending reactionary sensibilities?

The fact that climate change is human caused is deeply political in the US. Should the IPCC suppress this fact too to cater to a tiny minority of science deniers?

The line is where the expertise of scientists ends. They need to stay in their lane. They are no more qualified to talk about colonialism than anyone else, and attempts to do so are definitely taking a political side and will be perceived as such.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com