Attention Scott Pruitt: Red teams and blue teams are no way to conduct climate science

Posted on Monday December 18 2017

By Kerry Emanuel, Benjamin Santer, and Naomi Oreskes

 

In a recent op-ed, Steven Koonin, a professor at New York University, called for the establishment of a “Red Team/Blue Team” process for climate science. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt made a similar request in an interview with Breitbart News, and demanded “a true, legitimate, peer-reviewed, objective, transparent discussion about CO2.”

Such calls for special teams of investigators are not about honest scientific debate. They are dangerous attempts to elevate the status of minority opinions, and to undercut the legitimacy, objectivity and transparency of existing climate science.

The basic premise of these “Red Team/Blue Team” requests is that climate science is broken and needs to be fixed. The implicit message in the requests is that scientists belong to tribes, and key findings of climate science — such as the existence of a large human-caused warming signal — have not undergone adequate review by all tribes. This tribalism could be addressed, Koonin believes, by emulating Red Team/Blue Team assessment strategies in “intelligence assessments, spacecraft design, and major industrial operations.”

In Koonin’s view, “traditional” peer-review processes are flawed and lack transparency, and international scientific assessments do not accurately represent “the vibrant and developing science.” He implicitly accuses the climate science community of “advisory malpractice” by ignoring major sources of uncertainty. To use present-day vernacular, both Koonin and Pruitt are essentially claiming that peer-review systems are rigged, and that climate scientists are not providing sound scientific information to policymakers.

We do not consider ourselves to be members of any team or tribe. Our goal is not to “win” against “the other side.” Our prime motivation is to understand the natural world, and to use that knowledge and understanding to inform sensible decisions on important public policy questions. Whether we succeed in doing so is what we are ultimately judged on.

The peer-review system criticized by Koonin and Pruitt is imperfect, but it is the best system we have, and has served science well for several centuries.

The international assessments Koonin has questioned are made by large groups of experts, and are reviewed in an extraordinarily open and transparent way. These assessments receive detailed comments from many hundreds of scientists uninvolved in the writing of the assessment, with expertise in a wide range of fields, as well as from industry stakeholders and government representatives. All comments received are logged and made publicly available, together with responses from the assessment authors. Independent review editors determine whether the authors’ responses are accurate and adequate. Developing science, far from being ignored, is confronted directly and openly in such assessments.

Koonin’s claim that important uncertainties are neglected is patently incorrect. Scientists have spent many decades kicking the tires of climate science, identifying and quantifying key uncertainties, and trying to reduce those uncertainties. Critical examination of models, data and theory is not a fringe activity.

All scientists are inveterate tire kickers and testers of conventional wisdom. To paraphrase the Geico commercial, “If you’re a scientist, that’s what you do.” The highest kudos go to those who overturn accepted understanding, and replace it with something that better fits available data. Even after all the tire kicking, there is strong scientific consensus that planetary-scale warming is now unambiguous, and that human activities are the dominant contribution to this warming.

Critiques of this consensus have been offered up for decades. Each critique is often presented as a kind of smoking gun — one piece of evidence that falsifies all other evidence and understanding. There are many examples of such putative smoking guns. The ballistics of each gun has been carefully tested by thousands of scientists around the world. The “natural causes” gun doesn’t fit the overwhelming evidence of human-caused climate change. The “no warming” gun is inconsistent with reality.

If you’re a climate scientist, you’ve likely spent years of your career going down such rabbit holes, evaluating “natural causes” and “no warming” claims. You’ve considered and debated these claims. You’ve put them through their paces. They do not hold up to available evidence. Only the most robust findings survive peer review and form the basis of today’s scientific consensus.

Science has substantially improved our understanding of the physical climate system, the reality of human-caused warming, and the likely climatic outcomes if we do nothing to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Rejecting this tried and tested understanding would constitute real “advisory malpractice,” and would delay effective action to address human-caused climate change.

In short, climate science is not broken. It does not need fixing. We hear similar “broken” arguments about the media, the courts and our democracy itself. We are told that only one team or person can fix the problem; that if we place our trust in that one team, that one person, everything will be fine. In the case of climate science, we choose to place our trust in peer review and in the scientific community — not in teams appointed by Koonin or Pruitt.

Benjamin Santer is an atmospheric scientist and member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

Kerry Emanuel is a professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Naomi Oreskes is a professor of the history of science at Harvard University.

Upcoming Speakers

View all speakers past and present »

Announcements

Pence’s visit to Jerusalem aimed more at evangelicals at home — by Trudy Rubin

Posted on Saturday February 3

Some years ago, at a bookshop in Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport, I noticed a shelf of paperbacks aimed at the many Christian evangelicals from the United States who visit the Holy Land. I bought one paperback, by end-times theologians Thomas Ice and J. Randall Price, titled Ready to Rebuild: The Imminent Plan to Rebuild […]

Read full announcement »

Why it’s time to stop calling these hurricane disasters ‘natural’ by Kerry Emanuel

Posted on Sunday December 31

As the United States struggles to recover from two back-to-back hurricanes, it would be wise to reflect on why we keep having such calamities and whether they are likely to get worse. We must first recognize the phrase “natural disaster” for what it is: a sham we hide behind to avoid our own culpability. Hurricanes, […]

Read full announcement »

John Harvey’s “Notes on the Trump Nuclear Posture Review”

Posted on Friday December 22

I hope to entertain you today by guessing at some decisions that may arise from the ongoing Nuclear Posture Review being carried out by the Trump team and their associated implications. Can the fragile political consensus that has supported comprehensive modernization –  [Click to continue reading.]

Read full announcement »

Attention Scott Pruitt: Red teams and blue teams are no way to conduct climate science

Posted on Monday December 18

By Kerry Emanuel, Benjamin Santer, and Naomi Oreskes   In a recent op-ed, Steven Koonin, a professor at New York University, called for the establishment of a “Red Team/Blue Team” process for climate science. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt made a similar request in an interview with Breitbart News, and demanded “a true, legitimate, peer-reviewed, […]

Read full announcement »

How Putin Checkmated The US In Syria by Anna Borshchevskaya

Posted on Saturday October 28

September 30 will mark the two year anniversary of Moscow’s intervention in Syria that saved Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from an eminent collapse. Assad is largely responsible for one of the worst humanitarian tragedies since World War II. Today, in no small part thanks to Russian President Vladimir Putin, he has emerged in the strongest […]

Read full announcement »

Saudi Arabia wants to improve Image; Here’s How (by Juan Cole

Posted on Saturday September 16

Saudi Arabia is alleged to be hiring a PR firm to improve its tattered image in the West . As usual, such a campaign confuses substance with fluff and the money will be wasted. I am sympathetic to Saudi feelings that they get an unfair rap. In my Engaging the Muslim World I argued that […]

Read full announcement »

“Fire & Fury” or “Shock and Awe”: it is always the start of a Quagmire (by Juan Cole)

Posted on Wednesday August 9

If we weren’t talking about two nuclear-armed states with unhinged leaders, the war of words between the US and North Korea would be hilarious. Trump’s threat Tuesday that “”North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen” was […]

Read full announcement »

America’s Misadventures in the Middle East (by Chas Freeman, our May speaker)

Posted on Tuesday April 25

“From now on,” President Donald Trump declared in his inaugural address, “it’s going to be only America first, America first!” If so, no region stands to be more affected than West Asia and North Africa—what Americans call “the Middle East.” America’s interests there are now entirely derivative rather than direct. They are a function of […]

Read full announcement »

ISIL Terror-Trolls French Election by Juan Cole (our September speaker)

Posted on Sunday April 23

Thursday’s shooting at the Champs Elysee, left one policeman dead, another gravely injured, a third lightly wounded along with a German tourist shot in the heel. It was carried out by Karim Cheurfi, a French national aged 39, born at Livry-Gargan in Seine-Saint-Denis. He had opened fire with a Kalashnikov machine gun and was killed […]

Read full announcement »

Recent New York Times Article by Julia Preston

Posted on Sunday February 5

IMMIGRANTS WHO CAME TO U.S. AS CHILDREN FEAR DEPORTATION UNDER TRUMP                             Brought to the United States from Venezuela as a toddler, Carlos Roa was among the first young undocumented immigrants to be protected from deportation under a program President Obama set up in […]

Read full announcement »

Colin Woodard on the Trump Election

Posted on Thursday January 19

Since Election Day, many readers of “American Nations” have been asking for an analysis of the election via the underlying regional cultures identified in the book. Finally, with help from my colleague, Christian MilNeil, at the Portland Press Herald and Will Mitchell of Portland, Maine’s NBT Solutions, I’m able to comply.   Continue reading  

Read full announcement »

Read all announcements »