Who Would You Believe ?

Who would you believe about critical issues?

Let's look at a few of the options: Ned the neighbor, Reg the radio pundit, Paul the politician or Sid the scientist?

From conversations around me, the first three seem to win out over the latter.

What are the qualifications of each? Ned, if he made it through high school at all, perhaps did so with the help of his girl friend -- who has since gone on to become an educator. Reg depends upon inciting ignorance and agitating animus among his listeners. Paul relies on the campaign contributions of the local (and usually polluting) industries in his district.

Sid, however, works in a system set up to reward finding the truth and to punish hiding it. So, as a matter of self-interest, scientists are nudged toward the truth. They suffer a loss of prestige and esteem (and future funding) if someone else fails to replicate an experiment they have used to back up a claim. This is called "peer review."

This past week, Vice President Gore told the Senate that Congress must pass a comprehensive climate bill this year.

Subsequently, Alden Meyer, of the Union of Concerned Scientists said, "Once again, Vice President Gore is speaking the inconvenient truth: It's long past time for the U.S. to join the rest of the world in the fight against global warming, and it's essential for Congress to pass comprehensive climate legislation this year."

Finally, a recent poll among scientists regarding whether there is man made climate change, 92 percent said "Yes".

So who are you going to believe?