My previous post on Nature’s use of “denier” in a recently published paper has triggered a lively comment thread, including this question to me: Since you obviously object to the usefulness of the term “˜denier’, would you care to comment on its appropriateness after considering Micha Tomkiewicz“˜s thoughts? This is in reference to several provocative blog posts by a Holocaust…Continue Reading…
Several years ago, while wrestling with the climate skeptic/denier terminology, I queried a number of my colleagues on which term they used as shorthand. None of them used the “denier” term, but most were also uncomfortable with “skeptic” as a one-size-fits all label. My own thinking on this was captured by Time’s Bryan Walsh, who…Continue Reading…
Last week, I noted that the findings of this Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) report were parroted by all mainstream media journalists. Except this one, who actually vetted the report. Well, turns out that Ron Bailey at Reason magazine is the reason why UCS has now issued a clarification about one of its claims. The Guardian (which I…Continue Reading…
If climate information were perfect AND unfiltered, then people would get the facts directly without having the ideological spin on it. They would know inaction is suicidal AND in fact more disruptive of individual freedom AND requiring more government intervention than action [nothing requires more government intervention than scarcity, food shortages, telling people where they…Continue Reading…
When reports are issued by environmental advocacy groups, they are invariably taken at face value by environmental journalists. Oftentimes the report’s methodology and claims aren’t subject to any critical examination. What usually results are one-sided stories that treat the advocacy group’s report as gospel. A glaring example I’ve pointed to in the past is this…Continue Reading…
As I mentioned yesterday, I participated in a panel discussion at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) on environmentalism. The event centered on Roger Scruton’s new book, “How to Think Seriously About the Planet: The Case for an Environmental Conservatism.” (My fellow panelists included Daniel Sarewitz of Arizona State University and Kenneth Greene, an AEI resident scholar,…Continue Reading…
Last month, in several exchanges that pivoted off this post, Scott Denning, a climate scientist at Colorado State University, observed: There is an inexcusable silence from the political right about how to provide energy for 10 times as many people as we do today (almost all in China and India), without quadrupling CO2 for thousands…Continue Reading…
My, how times have changed. Thirty years ago, what was the likelihood of Americans electing a black president and accepting gay marriage? We really have progressed, haven’t we? Or maybe not. In 1982 (the year synthetic insulin was created via genetic engineering, by the way), 44% of Americans believed that God created humans in their…Continue Reading…
So what are the broader cultural, political and economic ripples of the German nuclear phase-out? On the one hand, it will send a signal to the world that nuclear is dated and dangerous and that switching it off is a greater priority than limiting carbon emissions as swiftly as possible. It will also damage the…Continue Reading…
It goes like this: 1. You fear something. 2. You find a hypothesis to justify your fear. 3. You block stuff that doesn’t support your case. That’s from Tim Minchin, who concisely describes the process that leads anti-GMO opponents and apparently many greens to support destruction of an agricultural experiment, that as John Timmer notes,…Continue Reading…