Is climate science 'neutral'? Should it be? Are humans even capable of being neutral about anything?
In this new-format episode, I dig into accusations that climate scientists risk undermining their work by going on climate marches. Can that really be true? Doesn't the scientific method speak for itself? And is it realistic to expect people to spend all day immersed in awful data, and NOT want to change the world afterwards?
I'm joined this episode by the fab Dr Lydia Messling, climate engagement expert and a very thoughtful and clever person. Lydia talks about her experiences in being told not to go on climate marches, and what she's learned about how climate scientists can be great public communicators. And Lydia helps me understand the big big difference between being 'neutral' and being 'objective': while the former's probably impossible in science or life, the latter is the very heart of what makes science fab in the first place.
This is a new type of episode that I hope will be the norm from now on. But it takes a lot longer to do. So if you want to see more like this, let me know - hello@yourbrainonclimate.com and please do leave a review. And do please consider chucking a few quid at www.patreon.com/yourbrainonclimate.
Owl noises:
08:12 - Lydia et al's Nature piece challenging the 'neutrality myth'...
08:22 - which was a response to this Nature piece from Ulf Büntgen.
12:25 - More on the BBC's change of tack on 'balance' in climate reporting, from the Guardian.
13:20 - The thoroughly unedifying Climategate affair, 10 years on.
28:45 - Lydia's 8 tips for climate science communication.
Your Brain on Climate is a podcast about human psychology vs the climate crisis. Contact the show: @brainclimate on Twitter, or hello@yourbrainonclimate.com.
Podden och tillhörande omslagsbild på den här sidan tillhör Dave Powell. Innehållet i podden är skapat av Dave Powell och inte av, eller tillsammans med, Poddtoppen.