Discuz! Board's Archiver

am5uh5gzdg 發表於 2013-5-30 19:23

lululemon sale online There s also this

entist who appears in the press too often risks being diminished as a popularizer. Nor do many researchers—understandably—want to go through the public and private ordeals of demonized climate scientists like Penn State s Michael Mann, who receives death threats in his email and who is currently part of a (highly politicized) investigation by Virginia s attorney general. Who wouldn t prefer to stay in the academy and out of the storm in this sort of environment?But as I ve written before, climate scientists can t absent themselves from the climate debate—it s just far too important. And the good news is that for the most part, scientists are still seen as relatively trusted figures—much more so than, I m willing to bet, the media or politicians. It s risky,[url=http://www.lululemononsales.com]lululemon sale online[/url], but scientists should be part of this discussion, even if it sometimes seems like less of a discussion than a shouting match that will never, ever, ever end. The first step to doing that might be letting us get to known them.?。Over at Dot Earth, Andrew Revkin has gotten his hands on a couple of documents being sent to the 831 researchers who will be contributing to the fifth assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—the report that sums up the state of research on global warming, and which is set to be finalized in 2014. Both have to do with how the scientists who will be working for the UN body should deal with troublesome media.First is a letter from Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC s chairman. In it Pachauri says that his sincere advice is that researchers should keep a distance from the media, and refer all questions about their work to the co-chairs of their individual working groups. (The IPCC assessments are divided into three working groups that deal with different parts of climate science.) The second document is a media guide for climate researchers put together by Resource Media, a non-profit NGO that has helped publicize the IPCC s work in the past. (You can see the document here.) In the guide, Resource Media advises researchers on where reporters may be coming from—apparently we tend to be jaded, world-weary, poor and sensitive to criticism—and how to deal with them. The advice ranges from the helpful—if you don t know the answer to a question, say so—to the goofy: Be positive. Especially jarring, though, is a list of words that the guide suggests scientists should avoid using when talking to the media because they may be misunderstood. Now, like any science reporter,[url=http://www.lululemononsales.com]lululemon athletica[/url], I m all for researchers avoiding unnecessary jargon—of which there is much in climate science. But some of the words to avoid are just, well, strange. Here s a selection:PDFReviewSpeciesPositiveNegativeTheoryUncertaintyErrorEcology(Yes, that s right. Researchers who are working on what will be the biggest scientific project on the biggest environmental problem in human history are for some reason supposed to avoid the term ecology. I guess we should just be glad they didn t include climate and change on this list.)Now it s obvious why some of the leadership of the IPCC is so worried about the media. The  climategate controversy and questions over a few errors about the rate of melting in the Himalayan mountains in the IPCC s last report were too often blown far out of proportion by members of the press—suddenly the bulk of climate science, groundlessly, was being called into question. Pachauri himself had a particularly rough time of it, his integrity attacked by some conservative media. And of course all scientists have legitimate complaints about working with the press. We do tend to be generalists, we are overworked and we too rarely have the time—or the training—to properly put a subject as complex as climate science into an 800-word article or post. (There s also this, from the IPCC media guide: A starting reporter can expect to earn about $20,000 to $30,000 a year. A “well-paid” reporter earns about $60,000. I m the last person to argue that I m not underpaid, but it s a little gauche to point it out,[url=http://www.lululemononsales.com]yoga clothes for women[/url], no? Especially the quotes aroundRelated articles:


頁: [1]

Powered by Discuz! Archiver 7.0.0  © 2001-2009 Comsenz Inc.