Climate Gate: One-stop shopping for the best refutation of climate-change denial

[skip fox]

Then main job for most of us seems to be showing those who are not already psychologically vested in the narrative of climate change denial that they can understand the true nature of the environmental catastrophe that confronts us now and the near future. I believe that by pointing to a reputable source for the amount of scientific support and a providing a common sense understanding of what that support means, most people who are not already ossified in their beliefs, will awaken to the massive problem that confronts us and threatens our existence (at least in the manner to which we have been accustomed) and the existence of thousands, perhaps millions, of other species as well.


The Simplest and Quickest Way to Refute Climate Change Denial:

Those who deny climate change claim that the majority of scientists have misrepresented their results or, even, fudged their data to fit the man-made-climate-change narrative in order to secure grants, tenure, and/or the respect of their fellow scientists. Some also argue against the fact that a staggering percentage (often the 97% touted by commentators). There are two issues here: 1.) What is the correct percentage? and 2.) What does such a percentage mean?


1. What’s the actual percentage and what is it based on?

The percentage is placed at 97% by NASA:

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

This site bases that percentage not on heresy but three articles in reputable scientific journals:

W. R. L. Anderegg, “Expert Credibility in Climate Change,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Vol. 107 No. 27, 12107-12109 (21 June 2010); DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1003187107.

P. T. Doran & M. K. Zimmerman, "Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change," Eos Transactions American Geophysical Union Vol. 90 Issue 3 (2009), 22; DOI: 10.1029/2009EO030002.

N. Oreskes, “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,” Science Vol. 306 no. 5702, p. 1686 (3 December 2004); DOI: 10.1126/science.1103618.


2. What does 97% mean?

What is it to say that 97% of serious, intellect people with advanced degrees have come to one conclusion while only 3% have come to another? What is it to say that these people have often been obsessed with science since their teens and engaged in discovering objective, scientific truths the majority of their adult lives? It is absurd to believe that even a significant minority of such professionals would misrepresent their life’s work much less use their work to deliberately deceive mankind simply for financial gain and the acceptance of their colleagues

What on the other hand is the likely percentage of those willing to deceive by manipulating data, torquing conclusions, or deliberately misreading statistics? Probably well under 8%. Likely 3% (ftnt 1)





********************************************************

Watch for trolls to attack this space. Climate change deniers, often in the employment of a conservative group or the petroleum industry, roam the web trying to confuse the issue. Check their sources if they give any and think it through for yourself, but all you really need to ask is how hard would it be to get 97% of any population to agree on a presumptively controversial issue much less 97% of individuals professionally committed to finding objective truth? What are the odds? Probably similar to those against winning millions of dollars in the lottery. Would any sane person gamble the future of the species on such a long shot?

********************************************************

(ftnt 1)Many of the deniers, by the way, are supported the petroleum industry. The Heartland Institute (which is supported by Exxon and others) even created the NIPCC (The Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change) to try to discredit the UN’s highly reputable IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

The following link is a decent, quick-and-dirty resource on climate change deniers and their backers put together by Media Matters:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/28/meet-the-climate-denial-machine/191545

[DetlefK]

1. A nice question for the next republican candidate for President:

"If 97% of all experts in a field agree on a conclusion, as a President, will you consider that enough of a consensus to jump to action or will you keep waiting?"