I'll admit, regarding my little SFSU/Steele project, recently I've spent a lot of time spinning my wheels. Seems no one wants to get close to the touchy question of professors/instructors having a duty to honestly represent the scientific work of others.
Apparently outright lying about the work of scientists is considered a sacred part of the academic process. I still can't get my mind around that logic. Admittedly I'm on the outside of academia looking in, so if anyone within the process would care to correct me or enlighten my interpretation please (If not here at WUWTW, how about an independent venue). After all, constructive learning is what this is supposed to be all about.
How is it that maliciously slandering honest professional scientists falls under the same acceptance? Or is it a blind eye?
So I've gone back to reviewing and learning some more while pondering the fundamental requirements for a constructive* rational debate - as opposed to the politicians lawyerly debate to win at all costs regardless of fidelity to the truth.
I have to wonder what the hell, has all of modern society accepted the myth that the best liar deserves to win?
That's why, with a tip of my hat, I share his thoughts in this post. But first, as learning goes, looking at related links led to other things and I was reminded of the following helpful chart by "Communicating the Science of Climate Change" and their effort to teach climate science communication skills.
Communicating the science of climate change
It is urgent that climate scientists
improve the ways they convey their findings
to a poorly informed and often indifferent public.
