In the second episode of In Defense of Climate Change, Bryce Nickels speaks with climate policy scholar Roger Pielke Jr. about his recent review of Science Under Siege (SUS), a book by Michael Mann and Peter Hotez (a.k.a. ‘Stick and Jab’) arguing that an “anti-science movement” threatens society.
Roger argues that SUS is less a serious analysis than a partisan manifesto—one that treats political disagreement, especially from Republicans, as a form of scientific heresy. A central theme is the book’s use of terms like “anti-science cabal” and “anti-science ecosystem.” He contends that these categories are vague and elastic, functioning less as analytic concepts than as labels for people the authors oppose. Rather than clarifying how science is distorted in public life, he suggests, the book collapses disagreement into moral warfare.
The episode also explores the broader politicization of science. Roger argues that parts of the scientific community have grown too comfortable embracing openly partisan narratives, thereby risking science’s credibility as a public enterprise meant to serve everyone—not just one political faction. At the same time, he criticizes heavy-handed political attacks on scientific institutions, arguing that restoring trust will require greater openness, pluralism, and tolerance for disagreement.
(recorded March 31, 2026)
Timestamps
00:30 – Introduction
02:08 – Roger explains why Science Under Siege (SUS) is a historical document
04:33 – Assessing SUS’s quality relative to other books in the same genre
07:16 – Who are Michael Mann and Peter Hotez?
09:51 – Bryce proposes ‘Stick and Jab’ as a nickname for Mann and Hotez
12:26 – What “anti-science” means and what is the “anti-science cabal”
15:57 – The “anti-science ecosystem” and why Roger finds it incoherent
17:51 – Roger evaluates SUS’s claim that Climategate was a “test run” for 2016 election interference
20:30 – Nazi analogies, journalism, and public ignorance
23:24 – SUS’s proposed solutions: filibuster, Supreme Court, and public messaging
26:08 – The scientific community’s embrace of partisan narratives
29:44 – Final thoughts on SUS
31:26 – Roger critiques the Trump-era’s impact on scientific institutions
34:32 – Closing thoughts
intro and outro by Tess Parks
About the Series
In Defense of Climate Change features conversations between climate policy scholar Roger Pielke Jr. and Rutgers professor and Science From the Fringe host Bryce Nickels. The series examines one of the most politically polarized areas of modern science—what the evidence actually shows about climate change, and how those findings are interpreted, amplified, and sometimes distorted once they enter politics and the media. By focusing on data, historical context, and intellectual honesty, the conversations aim to cut through extreme narratives and separate the underlying science from the stories that often dominate public debate.
About Roger Pielke Jr.
Roger Pielke Jr. is a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and professor emeritus at the University of Colorado Boulder, where he served on the faculty from 2001 to 2024 and founded the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research. His work focuses on the intersection of science, policy, and politics, particularly in climate, energy, innovation, and sports governance. In 2024 he was elected to the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters and also holds an honorary professorship at University College London. He writes the widely read Substack The Honest Broker, which has more than 37,000 subscribers worldwide, and is the author of several books on science policy, including The Honest Broker and The Climate Fix.
