Sensible Science
Nature, the science magazine, has a new blog on climate change. If this article, Confusion on Climate Variability and Trends, by Roger Pielke, Jr., of the University of Colorado, is any indication, then it’s safe to say that this blog is no place to look for global warming hysteria or for the polemics of reactionaries. Instead, look for debate on the details of climate research and the impact that has on policy and theory. Quoting the article:
Out of this, one thing seems clear — improved decision making is unlikely to occur if basic issues of climate science are simplified to such a degree that they are misrepresented, especially by an authoritative source like the New York Times.
Looking at the comments on Pielke’s article, it looks like I can also find indications of healthy debate among scientists and other interested parties, demonstrating Hegel’s thesis-antithesis-synthesis paradigm.
Update Maybe the debate isn’t healthy as much as it’s entertaining. See the comments on this post at Deltoid, for example.
Update 2 May 29th: Its editor posts a note of clarification on the direction and intent of the Climate Feedback blog.