What?

But this isn't even about policy, this is merely a scientific point.

policy is very consequential, it affects our quality of life

policy is based on information

Policy is mostly based on desire.

that information can be analyzed in a scientific matter

and proven wrong or right

Science can merely inform you in regard to how reality functions.

You can consider scientific facts in regard to setting policy, but the policy is merely set to reach a desired outcome, regardless of the scientific fact per se.

and how you think reality operates affects your desires

I do not contest that. Not entirely at least.

like the desire to stop climate change is based on research that shows climate change is problematic

Err...

You are making a slip there.

or that climate change is real

no im not

Climate change is real, yeah.

But it being problematic is a moral judgement.

And inherently human.

and its problematic to agriculture, energy production and so on

And really a judgment tying in with desire.

I understand hume's guillotine

It has a certain effect on the things you list which we humans consider problematic.

it simply states is do not justify oughts

not that it doesnt affect oughts

It being problematic is not in itself a scientific point.

because its does

scientist take for granted the sector theyre referring to dilapidating is problematic

anthropologist work with the axioms of what defines society or civilization

You do realize the idea of a problem existing is within the realm of human emotion, not within the realm of the natural world per se?

scientist most certainly use the term problematic in reference to normative standards that they make obvious

It is indeed normative.

i think youre not understanding

yes

Science is not normative though.

It is descriptive.

and scientist appeal to normative standard in how they define the research and its conclusions

Sure they do.

I am not contesting that.

like nearly every abstract does that

so youre not contesting anything i said