"The ultimate solution is for the general public to become more savvy about how science works."

This would be nice, but having toiled in these trenches for years and also looked at the data on public understanding of science, I think it's fair to say that this is a false hope.

This is a specific case of a more general argument: "If the general public became more savvy about X, then the problem at hand would be easier to solve." This argument is made about a huge range of issues. The problem is that most people are not savvy about most things, and never will be. What we need, I think, is a set of solutions that are robust to this reality.

John-

My point is actually somewhat different.  I am not saying that the general public needs to know more about the specific issue of climate science, but rather that the general public needs to be better educated about how science works.  If you understand how science as a social system works, then you can decode much of the debate even if you don't understand the technical details of the science.  That was one of the main goals (and themes) of my book.

While it may be that that's an unrealistic expectation, I think that as long as people don't understand how science works, we leave open the opportunity for climate denialists and their ilk to drag the debate into gridlock with their uncertainty agenda.

Translation into english would be helpful, technical jargon makes science into a sleep aid.

Even explaining how science works needs translation into terms that people who have no interest in quantum mechanics can understand.

How about this:  The mechanic you took your car to says it needs a new flavum valve and it will cost 600 bucks.  You take it to the dealer, the service manager says it will cost 1200.

You call your friend who is a mechanic, he says there is no such thing as a flavum valve and you are being scammed.  All these experts disagree, but you need your car fixed.

So what do you do?  With no regulation of scamming, this is the norm.  Most car owners are familiar with this.

They need to find an honest mechanic.  

We need honest scientists that come together and give us their best practical guess on what is happening, then choose their best guess of which technologies will solve the problem.

Scientists that hire out to the highest bidder and parrot what is expected won't do.  Take your climate to the coal, nuclear, or fuel farming dealership and you are screwed.  Take it to the scientists for hire that work for half the dealer scam prices and you are still screwed.

Obama is going to have to find some honest mechanics for US.  He can do it.  With our informed help.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Dr Amazing, it looks you also don't grasp the workings of science.

If you want to make a career in science you need to be honest and not make up things.

There are, of course, mercenary/ prostitute scientists (e.g. S Fred Singer, Pat Michaels), but they don't do science, but BSing.

Mars J. Pictor Florifulgurator, Western Bavarian Forest.

Andrew -

Sorry for being less than clear. It was precisely my point that a public savvy about how science works is unlikely to be achieved, and we need approaches robust to that reality.

When developing a solution to social problems, one should pretty much always start with the baseline assumption that the public is ignorant of [your subject matter] and will remain ignorant of [your subject matter].

grist.org