"Droppin' facts all over this wax; while bitches be cryin' 'bout a carbon tax!"

How many times have you heard a talking head preface what he's about to say with the words, "I'm not a climate scientist..." [see video below] right before he puts on his metaphorical lab coat and pontificates about why the latest scientific evidence to support anthropogenic climate change is fundamentally flawed?

I'm not a climate scientist.   Those five words have almost come to be the default disclaimer for anyone who wants to enter the scientific discussion about climate change — either in opposition or in support of the prevailing scientific belief that human activity is warming our atmosphere.  And though it may not be unique to climate science alone, seldom do you see pundits second-guessing NASA scientists launching astronauts into orbit with the words, "I'm not a rocket scientist, but...."? It is a curious phenomenon to say the least.

While there have been a handful of well-meaning efforts (read: letters) from those in the science community to get on the offensive — or, at least to get off the defensive — too many of those efforts were accompanied by, or, followed-up with careful revisions and painstaking qualifications (as scientists are wont to do). And though this tongue-in-cheek number by a group of young Australian climate researchers isn't exactly the type of tactic David Wescott recommended in his excellent piece about strategic climate communications, I think he'd agree it's in the right spirit.  (Caution: Some language may be a little NSFW, yo.)