Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 04-Nov-2023 14:55:33 JST Paul Cantrell

   “In other words, the economist who has been embraced as a guiding light by the global institution tasked with shepherding humanity through the climate crisis, who has been awarded a Nobel for climate costing, who is widely feted as the doyen of his field, doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”

   https://theintercept.com/2023/10/29/william-nordhaus-climate-economics/

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 05-Nov-2023 00:29:46 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Erin Conroy
     • Ulrike Hahn

     @UlrikeHahn @chargrille
     It’s written for popular accessibility for sure, but its polemic style is probably the approach it needs to take. And I’m very much on board with its core line of argument about the tendency of macroeconomic theory to be immune to falsification: saying “other lines of evidence and common sense are wrong” when the response should be “maybe this model is wrong.”

   • Embed this notice
     Ulrike Hahn (ulrikehahn@fediscience.org)'s status on Sunday, 05-Nov-2023 00:29:48 JST Ulrike Hahn

     in reply to

     • Erin Conroy

     @inthehands @chargrille not fond of the style of this piece but interesting read

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 05-Nov-2023 00:38:30 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • Ulrike Hahn

     Yes, agreed with @UlrikeHahn here:
     https://fediscience.org/@UlrikeHahn/111353005219335398

     The article’s main point is important enough that I’m sharing it anyway, but it’s not a model of argumentation.