David wrote:

> What is the relationship between the Azimuth project, and climate science and modelling? Recently John I saw that you said that the Azimuth project would be focusing on network theory, because that’s where most of the activity here is right now. In a sense I was trying to shoe-horn climate science into the picture, by talking about the possibility that network theory could eventually be applicable to the networks which comprise the climate system. But clearly I was reaching for this one.

It would be great if Azimuth had some people energetically working on climate science. But it doesn't - not right now. I've commissioned a blog post on the "pause in global warming" from [Jan Galkowksi](http://hypergeometric.wordpress.com/) but it's been months forthcoming. I've been trying to get [George Musser](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/critical-opalescence/) to live up to his promise to post our simple online climate model on his blog at _Scientific American_, but he's not doing it.

But the main fault is mine. I got stalled in my interview of Jacques Didier on glacial cycles. But perhaps more importantly, I see a way to do exciting research on network theory and I'm charging ahead with that, dragging about 5 grad students with me. On the other hand, I don't see how to do exciting research in climate science. I think there's a big need for _educational software_ in climate science, but I don't enjoy programming, and can't see it easily becoming part of my everyday work. I also don't see how to get math grad students involved in it. They want to be proving theorems. And in network theory, there are lots of theorems to be proved.

This may gradually change with time, and it could change instantly if we got one other person actively involved who did climate science as part of the Azimuth Project.

There are lots of people who do climate science, but they tend to take a look at Azimuth and decide it's not going to help them much: we've seen a couple say as much here.

It's not clear the world needs more climate science as much as it needs some other things, like answers to _what the heck are we going to **do** about global warming?_

Network theory is not the main answer to that question, but as a mathematician it's the portion of the answer I feel best qualified to provide, right now. It's where my biggest "competitive advantage" lies... except for my ability to explain stuff.