Consilience, Science and Politics

Today's ABC Radio National's Science Show gave one of the best discussions on why the scientific method works. Consilience Powers the Big Scientific Ideas by Paul Willis talks about the multiple lines of evidence that interweave and support a scientific theory. Big ideas such as the Theory of Evolution and Climate Change are supported by thousands of experiments by thousands of scientists, who vigorously attack, repeat and extend the results of those who came before them. Thus the theory builds robustness,
nuance and specificity.

Meanwhile, those who attack some of these consensus theories, do so by cherry picking- single criticisms built into improbable heights. Most legitimate scientists talk about the known knowns, the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns. By which they mean the grey areas and questions still to be answered and indeed asked. Thus building consilience.

Such scientific processes are different from what the rest of the world uses. Politics is the art of the possible - getting the members of the party and the people to agree to what is proposed. We saw this week what happens when the science becomes politically savaged when the Federal Parliament House of Representatives repealed the Carbon Tax, Australia's price on Carbon Pollution. Its a shameful episode in our history - economic theory, scientific theory and politics coming to very different results. I too can only say sorry this has happened like Ross Gittins in the Sydney Morning Herald

I've always felt that until and unless our economic systems are soundly built on the long-term energetic's of our natural world, we will do nothing productive, sustainable or correct. I look forward to the battle in the Australian senate on the Carbon Tax Repeal. As someone who gathered in Melbourne's Treasury Gardens and signed several petitions, I hope the small minority of people who are genuinely concerned can sway the political process in this time of greed and insanity.

Nanny State vs Free Market: My Reading Diary

Topics of conversation and ABC reporting recently include Pauline Hansen not getting into the NSW Senate with 2% of the vote, the Clubs & Gambling people screaming against Andrew Wilkie's proposal to attempt to control problem gambling and the on-going crises in Japan with the nuclear facility at Fukushima. News that Portugal's economy needs bailing out, the rise of the Aussie $ compared to the sinking of the US $ and other financial woes including the Resource Rent Tax and Carbon Tax are simmering away sometimes making the headlines, sometimes not.
Is this symptomatic of the conflict with the "Nanny" State ie large, interventionist, regulatory Government telling the business world that they must control their behaviour to enable social needs of equality, social support, and  long-term environmental improvement? This website says yes!
Or are the forces of business - endless growth, consumerism, jobs at any cost to environment or social needs gaining the upper hand again after a brief lull with the GFC? (hands out and begging)
My reading this month has included Joseph Stiglitz "Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy", Loretta Napoleoni's" Rogue Economics", Andrew Leigh's "Disconnected", "History's Greatest Deceptions" by Eric Chaline.
As the New York Times article on Joseph Stiglitz book comments "ersatz capitalism, the privatizing of gains and the socializing of losses". 
Books can give a larger view of whats happening  than a 3 minute TV news clip, 1 page internet link or 5 minute radio interview. What do you think?