Policy to address climate change does not match the scale and severity of the problem as defined by scientific research. While climate science can make valuable contributions towards climate policy, its actual significance should not be judged without a consideration of the politics which run through climate change science-policy interfaces. In order to assess the role and uses of science in political matters, two case-studies are considered: the debates around the health risks of tobacco smoking and the theory of nuclear winter.

In this exploratory piece, I propose that an exposition of the monster metaphor provides an insightful lens of analysis for the politics in and of science (the politics monster). Throughout the case studies, an ongoing learning process is observed in the political application of science, in attempts to tame the monster. The different strategies employed progress from ‘monster-exorcism’, to ‘monster-embracement’, ‘monster-adaptation’ and ‘monster-assimilation’. Similar processes are also evident in the climate change ‘debate’. From the evidence considered, there is little suggestion that these strategies relate strongly to the implementation of policy. This is used to suggest that climate science could become more deeply engaged in creative processes of politics to inspire more policy activity, while considering the effects that each strategy could induce.