Is it proper for a "scientist" to be seen with an advocacy group

[DanTex]

43. I agree with some of what you said.

However, there is a big difference between climate science and social science. One is a lot "harder" than the other.

That's true.

In addition, climate science does not run up against the problem of constitutional rights and public will.

Disagree. Climate science runs up against very serious issues with public will, see below. Also, while there aren't any obvious constitutional issues per se, there are issues of national sovereignty which the right-wing ideologues can play to very effectively.

For example, if we gave social scientists a blank check to pass laws they have determined will saves lives I don't think we will be very happy with the overall results and would rebel against them.

Not sure what you're trying to say here. I don't thing people would be very happy if any group of unelected technocrats were given a blank check to pass whatever laws they want.

Most of the people in this country are on board with GCC and the need to address it. Most of the people in this country are NOT on board with the most mentioned forms of gun-control. This is particularly true of gun owners, to tend to be better able to understand the restrictions the gun-control advocates want to put in place.

Not according to polls. As of right now, about 50% of Americans think global warming is exaggerated, a majority think that natural causes are to blame more than human intervention, etc., and it's getting worse due to propaganda. It is true that a majority favors of something generic like "regulate carbon emissions to prevent global warming", but when it comes down to real policies that would have the short term effect of increasing energy prices, there has been almost no political will.

On the other hand, while Americans are largely split on "generic" gun control questions, for specific policies, there is comfortable support. For example, over 60% of Americans are in favor of a national handgun registry, something which the NRA crowd would deride as "draconian".

Global warming is a much bigger long-term threat than gun violence. But, unfortunately, the political prospects for addressing GW are no better, and probably considerably worse than for guns. Hopefully, the magnitude of the global warming threat will dawn on the public soon, but so far, the right-wing propaganda and political maneuvering has been pretty effective both in guns and energy policy.