Is scientific reticence hindering climate understanding
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21428288 |
|---|---|
| Authors | David Spratt, David M Spratt (0000-0003-3350-7361, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 81 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 107-113 |
| Publication date | 2025-03-04 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0096-3402 • E-ISSN: 1938-3282 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/00963402.2025.2464442 |
| OpenAlex | W4408372803 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 18 |
Physical climate risks are systemic, non-linear, and cascading in a manner not incorporated into climate models. Particular attention should be given to the plausible high-end possibilities, and not the mid-range probabilities, because the worst-case scenarios will result in great and potentially existential damage. The bulk of climate research has tended to underplay these risks, and exhibited a preference for conservative projections and scholarly reticence—although increasing numbers of scientists have spoken out on the dangers of such an approach. This reticence is clearly displayed in the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which consistently errs on the side of “least drama,” downplays the more extreme possibilities, and offers mitigation paths with unacceptable risks of failure. The drivers of this reticence are methodological, political, and social
Astrobiology · Environmental ethics · Physics · Political science · Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics · Climate Change and Geoengineering · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Philosophy
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |