We can all imagine the disdain the recipient of the remark felt, but I do wonder whether the audience had enough sense to collectively groan and push back at such gaslighting?

Pielke’s ’honest broker’ ideal is nice rhetoric but basically smuggles in a non-reflexive account of scientific advice. Perfect for enabling the muzzling of scientists.
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1...

Name a single human frontier we didn’t pollute. It’s almost like (ignoring) environmental externalities is baked into the species, at least when commercial activity is involved.

Space is next?

Seems a Pyrrhic victory to want Republicans, who failed to stop Trump & MAGA taking over the Republican Party, aim to take over the Democratic Party.

If the Blue Jays win the World Series in Game 7 vs two north-American teams does that mean Australia does not exist?

Yes, without ever bluntly chasing out the absurdity of MAD, the writers captured the absurd spirit of “may as well commit to wiping us all out just in case they’re committed to wiping us all out”.

Yes, watched recently too. The uncertainty about both origin & intent of the missile launch, and uncertainty about both target & appropriate scale of response, was a fair exploration of the tangled ethics of strategic nuclear war.

Democrats thinking about Trump getting an MRI.

I would submit the whole thing as an article. Yes it is a detailed rebuttal of Pielke’s paper specifically, but it also highlights measurements errors that are valuable to consider when assessing extreme event risks.
An example of such discussions:
sites.nd.edu/kristin-shra...

We appreciate this rather painstaking analysis of Pielke’s ‘stack of mathematical artifacts’.
Pielke, bizarrely, appears to agree, maybe suggesting he thinks the database is toast but he found the truth anyway (magically)?

Imagine if the Spanish film ‘Rich Flu’ (2024) had the virus target CO2 Emissions Inequalities rather than straight income inequality.