Both cultures regard with some suspicion scientists who take positions on policy. Schneider, a professor in the Department of Biological Sciences and at the Institute for International Studies and, by courtesy, in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, has written popular magazine articles, op-ed pieces and books about climate change. He has appeared hundreds of times on television and dozens of times before Congress to discuss its implications and advocate solutions. Politicians depend on scientific advocates to translate complex, technical information into the layperson's language so they can get their points across in debates, presentations, briefs and other fast-paced communications. Politicians have to hope that the scientists' figures are stable enough to bear the weight of decisive action.
Advocates also make the scientific community uneasy.
Scientists strive to be objective. Value judgments make them uncomfortable, Schneider said. Ideally, we want an infinite set of replicable experiments. There can be no objective data on 2100 for 99 years. Because climate policy relies on predictions, deciding what action to take will require subjective judgments.