Huh?

I might think I know what I know. What I don't know for sure is what I don't know. And with that Rumsfeldian intro I give you this: Clarity on uncertainty

I honestly had trouble getting to grips with it, and I once assembled an IKEA bookcase.

But this is Nature, and there are certain issues raised that I feel I should share in case you lot can make head nor tail of it.

Where I perk up is here: 'Even IPCC scientists have acknowledged that their treatment of uncertainty is "difficult to communicate". Effectively communicating to a wider audience and reaching the level of transparency now being asked of the IPCC will require a careful balancing act.

And, as I think was indicated in the piece as well, have caution on how the doom and gloom gets sold with such enthusiasm, as it kinda sets the cause back when it's shown to have been a tad over-egged.

I still think we need to cut back and stop wasting, though.

And as I am on a balancing act with this post let me share this one, which I was debating bearing in mind the origin (I think they are a bit on the Republican side, so keep that in mind): Are sunspots prime suspects in global warming?

Mainly, I genuinely liked they way they have embraced the term 'climate change optimists', which I have to say is less pejorative in debate. Now if we can find one for those of an equally passionate disposition on the side facing them in many discussions, we might even see a move to more civilized exchanges and possible compromise. With a view to joint action.

OK, it's Friday. A guy can dream.