« Friday Night is Music Night (MotorCity Mashup Edition) | Main | Re-tread Gore »

Climate Scientists Are Different

Newsflash: Climate scientists are different than the general public - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post

The researchers studied the results of Myers-Brigg Type Indicator personality tests that were provided by about 200 early-career Ph.D. scientists doing interdisciplinary research related to climate change, and compared these to data on the general public

For instance, the study finds that climate scientists tend to fall within the Myers-Brigg category of those who tend to process information based on “intuition,” whereas the general public shows a preference for “sensing.”

The preference for Intuition by early career climate scientists suggests that this group is likely to be more oriented towards future climate impacts than members of the general public, who generally prefer Sensing over Intuition. For Sensors, the current situation is more relevant and more easily appreciated, and past experience and concrete facts are more trusted than future possibilities.

Another intriguing finding is that climate scientists have a “strong preference” for “judging” rather than “perceiving,” which has implications for how they handle uncertainty and doubt.

…on average, climate change researchers will prefer to reach a decision or come to closure and ‘move on’ to the next step more quickly than the general population. The general population, with a higher proportion of Perceivers, is more likely to see room for doubt, or want to take more time to explore possible alternatives, especially when outcomes are not likely to be positive.

So they tend to be judgemental dogmatic guessers rather than careful methodical data lovers....nice to have confirmation.


The terminology may be slightly wierd, and the study was of "activists" more than scientists - then compared to far larger studies of general population, but yes: AGW types seem to think that correlation does indeed confirm causation, and rather than revisit the results when additional/different data contradict prefer to alter the data rather than keep an open mind. Goodness, Professor JOnes admits that the Medieval Warm existed for the entire Northern Hemisphere, but still says the "Hockey Stick" which does not show it is nonetheless valid because lack of Southern Hemisphere data makes it proper to assume any blasted data he and Mann et al feel like.

Einstein may have believed quantum theory invalid, but he did not throw out the data and mathematics - or the people looking into it.

And what the author of the article gets out of this study is that the Al Gore approach if blaming all current weather - hot, cold, wet, dry - and other phenomena such as wildfires in California on AGW is better than the "projections" (enphatically not. mind you, "predictions") into the future.


Post a comment