[Eran]

It sounds like the determination of meritocracy and promotion is made by the leadership already in place, right?

Current members of the ruling council (akin to the Politburo) elect new members (from below), as well as promote one of their own members for leadership. Occasionally, reformists (like Deng Xiaoping or Mikhail Gorbachev) will be elected. But more often then not, conservatives will rule (like the current Pope).

With that in mind, what mechanism would ensure (or even make it likely) that a failed leadership will get replaced?


As for climate change, we have to make a careful distinction between what it is that the scientific community mostly agrees on (the presence of anthropomorphic change in climate) and my claim (that, in the scheme of things, climate change doesn't represent a serious problem).

Climate scientists, while arguably qualified to opine on the first question, have very little scientific expertise to bring to the second question. The second question critically involves sociological and economic issues with which climate scientists are not generally familiar.
To the extent that they even have a view (and most don't), it carries no greater weight than that of any other person.

[starman2003]

Even in nondemocratic states, failed leaders get replaced when they lose support. Khruschev didn't last long after the '62 missile crisis fiasco, and Mussolini was dumped by his own fascists in '43.

The second question critically involves sociological and economic issues with which climate scientists are generally not familiar.

Any fool can see that decreasing polar ice, rising sea levels, increasing desertification, more frequent and severe storms etc can cause serious problems.