Feed on
Posts
Comments

That’s ‘skeptics’ in the true sense of the word.

The Center for Inquiry (CFI), affiliated with the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI), took a look at the ‘United States Senate Minority Report on Global Warming’. This Senate report came out in January 2009 with the tagline “More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims”.

CFI’s Office of Public Policy examined the report in what they called the Credibility Project. The results:

    • Slightly fewer than 10 percent could be identified as climate scientists.
    • Approximately 15 percent published in the recognizable refereed literature on subjects related to climate science.
    • Approximately 80 percent clearly had no refereed publication record on climate science at all.
    • Approximately 4 percent appeared to favor the current IPCC-2007 consensus and should not have been on the list.

…After painstakingly taking the time to vet many of the scientists now serving as “consensus busters” Jordan says that it is difficult for him and his colleagues not to conclude that “this is one more effort of a contrarian community to block corrective action to address a major—in this case global—problem fraught with harmful consequences for human welfare and the environment.”

It isn’t enough to simply don the mantle of “skeptic”, as so many of the climate science deniers have done. One should also try to adhere to the principles of skepticism, and it wouldn’t hurt to have at least a passing familiarity with the epistemic virtues.

So what happens when the skeptics at CFI apply scientific skepticism to climate science? They find that it is, in fact, good science.

Dr. Paul Kurtz, the founder of the Center for Inquiry, stressed that “It is essential that the government base its policies on the best scientific information we have and it is a preponderance of scientific judgment that global warming poses a dire threat to the future of humanity on the planet.”

And what happens when CFI applies skepticism to the claims of the climate skeptics in the Senate report? They find what I would call pseudoskepticism.

After painstakingly taking the time to vet many of the scientists now serving as “consensus busters” Jordan says that it is difficult for him and his colleagues not to conclude that “this is one more effort of a contrarian community to block corrective action to address a major—in this case global—problem fraught with harmful consequences for human welfare and the environment.”

CFI’s efforts here speak to a particular difficulty that many people have, including in the skeptical community, with identifying credible expertise and sources of information (for some of the best writing on the web on this I recommend readers visit climatesight.org, and peruse the credibility spectrum). What looked like a credible and important list – no less than 700 scientists dissenting on global warming claims – was nothing of the sort. Now if it were 700 peer reviewed papers that together presented evidence of a coherent and credible alternative to global warming theories, that would be something else, but these lists of names serve only to obfuscate. And it works. Even James Randi, a leading light in the skeptical movement, fell for one such list, writing: “…some 32,000 scientists, 9,000 of them PhDs, have signed The Petition Project statement proclaiming that Man is not necessarily the chief cause of warming, that the phenomenon may not exist at all, and that, in any case, warming would not be disastrous,” later adding, “I strongly suspect that The Petition Project may be valid.”

The Petition Project is of course irrelevant to the science. Anyone can sign a petition, and having a PhD does not confer upon one any expertise in climate change; especially if that PhD is in an entirely unrelated discipline to climate change, as was true for the vast majority of the signatories. The scientific research is what matters. Yet the petition appeared more credible to James Randi than the science.

It is gratifying, therefore, to see CFI taking strides in reclaiming the mantle of skepticism from climate science deniers. Scientific skepticism has proven to be a valuable tool for identifying pseudoscience, through its demand that fringe ideas meet exacting standards of proof. Still, the skeptical community needs to do a better job at identifying pseudoskepticism and the tactics of denial, and CFI’s Credibility Project is a very good step in that direction.

18 Responses to “Skeptics tackle global warming denial”

  1. commenter says:

    And how did they interpret “qualified” climate scientist?.. There’s something to be said about following the money. There’s a lot of money at stake in cap and trade, and an enormous amount of power to be grabbed in the name of “climate change”. The senate or house included a provision that gives the president martial power if the carbs go past a certain percent that realistically would happen in a year. So I will not buy into anything the media says if it results in a powerplay by the federal government.

  2. Hi there just wanted to give you a quick heads up.
    The words in your post seem to be running off the screen in Firefox.
    I’m not sure if this is a formatting issue or something to do
    with web browser compatibility but I figured I’d post to let
    you know. The style and design look great though! Hope you get the
    problem solved soon. Kudos

  3. Superb website you have here but I was curious if you knew of any forums that cover the same topics discussed
    here? I’d really love to be a part of group where I can get comments from other experienced
    people that share the same interest. If you have any suggestions,
    please let me know. Many thanks!

    Also visit my website :: Beats For Sale

  4. I’m still learning from you, but I’m making my way to the top as well. I certainly liked reading everything that is posted on your site.Keep the stories coming. I enjoyed it!

  5. It’s really a cool and useful piece of information. I’m satisfied that you
    just shared this helpful information with us. Please stay us informed like this.
    Thank you for sharing.

  6. Kaleidoscope is everyone’s decision, when quality issues!

  7. Wow, that’s what I was seeking for, what a information!
    present here at this webpage, thanks admin of this website.

  8. Steve says:

    Hello, I think your website might be having browser
    compatibility issues. When I look at your blog in Chrome, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping.

    I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other then that, amazing blog!

  9. Houston business people love the fact that this company will guarantee that
    their shipments will probably be cleared through customs and
    shipped to their domestic or international destinations promptly and in good condition. Your company is sure to get the most efficient and
    most inexpensive route even for difficult shipment situations.
    Depending for the nature in the commodity, a custom broker must
    be selected.

  10. nedves punci says:

    That is a good tip particularly to those fresh to the blogosphere.
    Simple but very accurate info… Thanks for sharing this one.
    A must read article!

  11. I used to be referred to Sharp by my purchasing store, stating it was out of their hands, that
    in my case the problem ought to be covered by the company.

    my blog; sharp 70 inch lcd tv dimensions

  12. others sleep says:

    Pretty! This has been an extremely wonderful post.

    Thanks for providing these details.

  13. cebuanas says:

    Thanks for your personal marvelous posting! I quite enjoyed
    reading it, you are a great author.I will make sure to bookmark your blog and will come back someday.

    I want to encourage that you continue your great job, have a
    nice evening!

  14. Elisa says:

    Remarkable issues here. I’m very satisfied to see your article.
    Thanks so much and I am taking a look forward to contact you.

    Will you kindly drop me a mail?

  15. When I was in therapy throughout my early twenties I developed
    transference for my therapist in that he was a father determine.

  16. Browse our online inventory for your subsequent North Charleston used car, truck or SUV.

  17. Een pen bedrukt met uw emblem is dus een uitermate effectieve marketingtool en bij ons ook nog eens goedkoop.

  18. These witches talk with evil spirits called familiars, which frequently take the form
    of a black cat.

Leave a Reply