> I don't think that a science which at its core deals with the human causes and human consequences of climate can be unpolitical.
This is a ridiculous argument. The physics of a bullet hitting a human body is obviously dealing with a human cause and consequence, and yet can be stated completely free of any politics or bias.
You're confusing the very human project of science (what we look at, why we look at it, where resources get allocated) with a domain of scientific knowledge.
This is a ridiculous argument. The physics of a bullet hitting a human body is obviously dealing with a human cause and consequence, and yet can be stated completely free of any politics or bias.