Trump and his government plan to shutdown Mauna Loa observatory which has been tracking atmospheric CO₂ levels for 67 years.
Wann endlich wieder #Vermögensteuer?
Noch 275 Unterschriften, dann haben wir die ersten 10.000 Unterschriften bei unserer Online-Bundestagspetition geknackt! #TaxTheRich
Direkt hier unterschreiben 👉 https://epetitionen.bundestag.de/petitionen/_2025/_04/_09/Petition_180180.nc.html
That's when scientific "truth" can be labelled by "realists" as "unhelpful" or "a disruption that only strengthens the critics". How often have I been accused of just fueling the populist right with my pro-environment stance. As if!
That's when I personally buckle down on my analytical insights as a scientist - combined with the core of ethical ideals upon which our culture is built even as we flount them all the time: that inclusive justice and safeguarding the future are an obligation.
3/4
That's when what I call "toxic realism" becomes a danger: the seduction of scientists to frame analytical conclusions in a way that adapts to what seems feasible, arguing it's better to achieve progress than be right but powerless. I'm told in such discussions a version of: "Being right and idealistic buys you nothing if there's no path to power, change. So don't insist like you do when it just burns bridges."
But all too often, I find it's the analytical findings that end up subverted.
2/4
When capable scientists become government advisors, they're confronted with the realities of political power equations.
That is when they are confronted with situations where facts count for little if the conclusions don't have political support in the constellations of power.
"Politics isn't mathematics", as the then German minister of the environment Schulze famously once said when asked about my calculations of a fair remaining CO2 budget for Germany (since used up for 1.5C).
1/4
This - now - is the time to stick to our knowledge, double down; not fluidly adapt it to a field awash with political propaganda.
In the end, we need both: work within the system, but also without. One should not accuse others of naiveté; but consider it a division of labour.
Personally, I'm more interested in the subversive power of scientific insight to change societies than the sober realities of political power equations. Such insight will win out in the end. Of that I am convinced.
4/4