Air - Environmental Transformations - page 53

atmospheric transformations that are associated
with the Anthropocene and in alerting society to
the dangers of air pollution and climate change.
This section considers in more detail the nature of
science and its particular role in mediating the
relationships between humans and the atmosphere
within which we collectively live.

methods is an important part of the modern
scientific tradition because it enables the experi-
mental findings of one scientist to be compared
(and then verified or nullified) with the work of
other scientists (Hacking, 1983: 1-17).
Taken together, the objectivity and universality
of modern science are important because they
enable the production of more reliable and
trustworthy accounts of the real world. It is crucial
at this point, however, not to conflate the reliability
of scientific studies of the real world with the
notion of truth. At one level, scientists regularly
make mistakes and misunderstand the things they
observe (scientists originally thought, for example,
that the worst heath effects of air pollution could
be prevented if humans breathed through their
noses rather than their mouths. The fine-grained
nature of many particulates, however, meant
that this precaution made little difference to
the impacts of air pollution on human health). At
another, deeper level, however, the nature of
modern science means that it is constantly seeking
to challenge accepted truths in the pursuit of more
effective ways of understanding the physical world.
It is in this context important to understand
scientific knowledge (perhaps pertaining to the
nature of climate change, or the health impacts of
particulate air pollution for example) not as
unchallengeable truths, but as the best available
knowledge that we have at that particular moment
in time. This is precisely why the Austro-British
philosopher Karl Popper famously observed that
it is the ability to be proven wrong (or 'falsified'),
and not its relationship to essential truths, which
marks scientific knowledge out from other forms
of knowledge, such as those pursued in philosophy
and the social sciences (Popper, 2002 [1950]).
Recognizing that it is the ability of scientific
knowledge to be proven wrong - not its association
with essential truths - marks it out as a distinctive
form of knowledge, and enables us to appreciate
the complex forces that shape and change the
nature of scientific understandings. A crucial factor
within the production of scientific knowledge is the
notion of scientific consensus . At any given time

3.3.1 On the nature of modern
science
Of all of the Earth's spheres, the atmosphere is the
most transitory. A complex mix of gases and water
vapour, it is in a constant state of flux. This flux is
driven at the local level by pressure systems and
the weather. At larger scales, this flux can be seen
within the seasonal transfers of carbon between the
atmosphere and the biosphere. Taken together, the
ever-changing nature of the atmosphere makes it
very difficult for humans to know with certainty
the precise nature of the fluctuations that are
associated with this complex system. It was in this
confusing atmospheric context that the certitudes
of science appeared to offer humanity an effective
basis for better understanding its relationship with
the air.
The onset of the scientific revolution in
sixteenth-century Europe resulted in the emer-
gence of methods of observation and measurement
that promised a new basis for humans to perceive
and study the environments that surrounded
them. At its heart, the scientific revolution rejected
the power of religion and monarchical rulers as
sources of absolute knowledge, and suggested that
true wisdom could only be obtained through
the dispassionate and careful scientific observation
of the world (see Merchant, 1990; Shapin and
Schaffer, 1985). Modern science has two key
characteristics: 1) a commitment to objectivity;
and 2) a quest for a universal basis for the study of
nature (Haraway, 1991: 183-201). The objectivity,
or neutrality, of the scientist is seen as crucial to
ensuring that the findings of science are not
corrupted by personal bias or political manipula-
tions. The idea of universal, or standardized,