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

I do not precisely recall what I was contesting, but it had to do with the definition of 'policy'.

scientist conclude that climate change is problematic relative to the normative of having a productive, healthy or capable society

i dont think so

We were originally speaking about policy and consequence.

In relation to scientific fact.

and how its informed by science

Ah, that is what I sort of contested.

I made the claim that policy is based on desired outcome.

I would like to amend that however.

how policy is adopted in reference to perceived reality and how science informs perceived reality

That I do agree with.

k