...wrapping political and ethical choices in the mantle of science is what Porters column is all aboutcomparing to climate change denial the lefts failure to accept the scientific consensus on nuclear power, meaning that 65 percent of scientists favored building more nuclear plants in a Pew poll. The difference between an actual scientific consensus on the physical fact of global warming and a political preference expressed by two out of three scientists for a particular energy policy ought to be obvious; conflating the two is doing the opposite of what Porter claims to be advocating for, which is somehow disassociating the scientific facts from deeply rooted preferences about the world we want to live in.
Repeat:
The difference between an actual scientific consensus on the physical fact of global warming and a political preference expressed by two out of three scientists for a particular energy policy ought to be obvious; conflating the two is doing the opposite of what Porter claims to be advocating for, which is somehow disassociating the scientific facts from deeply rooted preferences about the world we want to live in.