The Map vs Territory problem.
Why does the quest for numerical certainty trump acknowledging the fundamental physics unfolding in front of us? I understand scientists need to be dedicated to numerically “Mapping” out physical reality with exacting precision. No detail can be left unexplored. Still, in the end all this effort is so we can better understand our physical world, the “Territory” if you will.
Please consider, when it comes to explaining climate science understanding to an under-informed collection of leaders and citizens, is it a service or disservice to constantly return the discussion to uncertainties rather than focus on all we do know and the conclusions that can be drawn with great certainty?
Minutia that in itself requires additional background knowledge to appreciate. What good does it do? What sort of abuses has it opened scientists up to? Consider the case of Dr. Mann, one simply needs to read the caveats within those early papers and all the contrived charges made against him and the work of his team evaporate. But, did anyone take notice?
Nope, the contrarians fabricated a fantastical storyline, which has dominated the public discussion on both sides ever since. Exploding trivia into a show stopper. That was a result of a failure of imagination and failure to convey all you do know in a way that presents folks with a fundamental understanding and the critical thinking skills to see through the contrarian deceptions.
Instead, in the public arena, soberly learning about climate understanding has been left behind for preoccupations with endlessly playing defense against a repetition of contrived childish politicized nonsensical fabrications that have been embraced by all too many.
What about the sins of omission? By that I mean not acknowledging fundamental physics, which we know act according to their own exacting and unchanging laws, whether we understand every detail of their behaviors or not.
