‘Climategate’ and the maturing of post-normal science

Abstract

In response to the Climategate scandal, I wrote a number of essays, including a posting on an important critical blog. There I explained the affair in terms of post-normal science. First, that the scientists concerned were doing ‘normal science’, not coping with uncertainties, and then that the ‘extended peer community’ had come into power on the critical blogosphere. There was already a current of criticism of PNS, seeing it as contributing to the supposed corruption of climate science through its denial of Truth. One important essay in that tendency is reproduced here. In my reply to my critics, I argued that we are on the same side, committed to the integrity of science; and I reviewed the progression of my own ideas on climate change. In the light of the criticisms, I conclude with some searching questions about post-normal science.