Climate change 气候变化
A heated debate 激辩
Nov 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Why political orthodoxy must not silence scientific argument
为何有了政治说法，还应有科学的辩论？
Illustration by Claudio Munoz
“WHAT is truth?” That was Pontius Pilate’s answer to Jesus’s assertion that “Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.” It sounds suspiciously like the modern argument over climate change.
“真理是什么？”耶稣说完“相信真理的人都能听到我”之后，彼拉多随即如此问道。听起来耳熟？在当代，气候变化引起的争辩就与此有相似之处。
A majority of the world’s climate scientists have convinced themselves, and also a lot of laymen, some of whom have political power, that the Earth’s climate is changing; that the change, from humanity’s point of view, is for the worse; and that the cause is human activity, in the form of excessive emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.
国际上，大多数气候科学家不但说服了自己，也说服了很多门外汉（其中包括一些有政治影响力的人）--地球的气候正在改变；这种改变，从人道主义角度来看，是消极的；这种改变的始作俑者是人类，是他们通过排放超量的诸如二氧化碳的温室气体而造成的。
A minority, though, are sceptical. Some think that recent, well-grounded data suggesting the Earth’s average temperature is rising are explained by natural variations in solar radiation, and that this trend may be coming to an end. Others argue that longer-term evidence that modern temperatures are higher than they have been for hundreds or thousands of years is actually too flaky to be meaningful.
少数人对此表示怀疑。有些人提出，最近有充分的数据表明地球平均气温上升是由于太阳辐射的自然变化，而这种变化已接近尾声。其他人也认为长期的证据显示现在的气温高于过去几百年甚至几千年的说法是站不住脚的。
Such disagreements are commonplace in science. They are eventually settled by the collection of more data and the invention of more refined (or entirely new) theories. Arguments may persist for decades; academics may—and often do—sling insults at each other; but it does not matter a great deal because the stakes are normally rather low.
对于科学家们来说，这样的争论司空见惯。只要有更多的数据和更完整的（或全新的）理论，他们最终便会折服。争论可能会持续数十年；学者们可能，实际上经常起唇舌之争，出言伤人，但因为赌注通常不大，因此也无伤大雅。
The stakes in the global-warming debate, however, could scarcely be higher. Scientific evidence /that climate change is under way, is man-made, and is likely to continue happening/ forms the foundation for an edifice of policy which is intended to transform the world’s carbon-intensive economy into one which no longer spews greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. A lot of money, and many reputations—both academic and political—are involved.
然而在全球气候变暖这边的争辩，赌注却高得多。科学证据声称气候变化正在进行中，是人类之过，还很可能持续下去。于是各国政府纷纷出台了一摞的政策，试图 把目前以碳为主导的经济发展模式转向清洁的发展模式。在这过程中，无论是学者还是政客，一掷千金甚至连名誉也搭上的大有人在。
Sceptics claim that this burden of responsibility is crushing the spirit of scientific inquiry. Scientists, they maintain, are under pressure to bolster the majority view. The recent publication of embarrassing e-mails from the University of East Anglia, an important centre of climate science (see article), revealing doubts about data and a determination not to air such concerns publicly, has strengthened these suspicions.
怀疑者们认为，沉重的责任正在碾碎科学探究精神。他们还坚持认为科学家们为了支持多数人的观点而饱受压力的煎熬。最近曝光的一封来自东安吉利大学这所著名气候科学研究中心的电子邮件让人局促不安。邮件的曝光揭示的对数据的疑问和不公开这些忧虑的决心，更印证了以上的怀疑。
There is no doubt that politics and science make uncomfortable bedfellows. Politicians sell certainty. Science lives off doubt. The creation /of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to establish a consensus on the science /was an excellent idea for policymakers, who needed a strong scientific foundation for their deliberations, but it sits uncomfortably with a discipline that advances by disproving accepted theories and overturning orthodoxies.
毫无疑问，政治和科学夫唱妇随并不是一件好事。政客们要确凿的事实，而科学家们则以怀疑为乐。对决策者来说，要得出深思熟虑的结果就需要无懈可击的科学 性，所以成立国际气候变化小组以达成科学的共识是英明之举。但要前进就必须反对公认的理论和推翻正统的说法。如此规则让这个小组坐立难安。
A heated debate 激辩
Nov 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Why political orthodoxy must not silence scientific argument
为何有了政治说法，还应有科学的辩论？
Illustration by Claudio Munoz
“WHAT is truth?” That was Pontius Pilate’s answer to Jesus’s assertion that “Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.” It sounds suspiciously like the modern argument over climate change.
“真理是什么？”耶稣说完“相信真理的人都能听到我”之后，彼拉多随即如此问道。听起来耳熟？在当代，气候变化引起的争辩就与此有相似之处。
A majority of the world’s climate scientists have convinced themselves, and also a lot of laymen, some of whom have political power, that the Earth’s climate is changing; that the change, from humanity’s point of view, is for the worse; and that the cause is human activity, in the form of excessive emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.
国际上，大多数气候科学家不但说服了自己，也说服了很多门外汉（其中包括一些有政治影响力的人）--地球的气候正在改变；这种改变，从人道主义角度来看，是消极的；这种改变的始作俑者是人类，是他们通过排放超量的诸如二氧化碳的温室气体而造成的。
A minority, though, are sceptical. Some think that recent, well-grounded data suggesting the Earth’s average temperature is rising are explained by natural variations in solar radiation, and that this trend may be coming to an end. Others argue that longer-term evidence that modern temperatures are higher than they have been for hundreds or thousands of years is actually too flaky to be meaningful.
少数人对此表示怀疑。有些人提出，最近有充分的数据表明地球平均气温上升是由于太阳辐射的自然变化，而这种变化已接近尾声。其他人也认为长期的证据显示现在的气温高于过去几百年甚至几千年的说法是站不住脚的。
Such disagreements are commonplace in science. They are eventually settled by the collection of more data and the invention of more refined (or entirely new) theories. Arguments may persist for decades; academics may—and often do—sling insults at each other; but it does not matter a great deal because the stakes are normally rather low.
对于科学家们来说，这样的争论司空见惯。只要有更多的数据和更完整的（或全新的）理论，他们最终便会折服。争论可能会持续数十年；学者们可能，实际上经常起唇舌之争，出言伤人，但因为赌注通常不大，因此也无伤大雅。
The stakes in the global-warming debate, however, could scarcely be higher. Scientific evidence /that climate change is under way, is man-made, and is likely to continue happening/ forms the foundation for an edifice of policy which is intended to transform the world’s carbon-intensive economy into one which no longer spews greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. A lot of money, and many reputations—both academic and political—are involved.
然而在全球气候变暖这边的争辩，赌注却高得多。科学证据声称气候变化正在进行中，是人类之过，还很可能持续下去。于是各国政府纷纷出台了一摞的政策，试图 把目前以碳为主导的经济发展模式转向清洁的发展模式。在这过程中，无论是学者还是政客，一掷千金甚至连名誉也搭上的大有人在。
Sceptics claim that this burden of responsibility is crushing the spirit of scientific inquiry. Scientists, they maintain, are under pressure to bolster the majority view. The recent publication of embarrassing e-mails from the University of East Anglia, an important centre of climate science (see article), revealing doubts about data and a determination not to air such concerns publicly, has strengthened these suspicions.
怀疑者们认为，沉重的责任正在碾碎科学探究精神。他们还坚持认为科学家们为了支持多数人的观点而饱受压力的煎熬。最近曝光的一封来自东安吉利大学这所著名气候科学研究中心的电子邮件让人局促不安。邮件的曝光揭示的对数据的疑问和不公开这些忧虑的决心，更印证了以上的怀疑。
There is no doubt that politics and science make uncomfortable bedfellows. Politicians sell certainty. Science lives off doubt. The creation /of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to establish a consensus on the science /was an excellent idea for policymakers, who needed a strong scientific foundation for their deliberations, but it sits uncomfortably with a discipline that advances by disproving accepted theories and overturning orthodoxies.
毫无疑问，政治和科学夫唱妇随并不是一件好事。政客们要确凿的事实，而科学家们则以怀疑为乐。对决策者来说，要得出深思熟虑的结果就需要无懈可击的科学 性，所以成立国际气候变化小组以达成科学的共识是英明之举。但要前进就必须反对公认的理论和推翻正统的说法。如此规则让这个小组坐立难安。
