DOCSLIB.ORG

How to Combat Distrust of Science - Scientific American

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How to Combat Distrust of Science - Scientific American How to Combat Distrust of Science - Scientific American http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-combat-distrust-of-sci... By Sander van der Linden and Stephan Lewandowsky | April 28, 2015 | Acceptance of science has become increasingly polarized in the United States. Indeed, a recent Pew poll shows that there is a substantial and growing amount of public disagreement about basic scientific facts, including human evolution, the safety of vaccines and whether or not human-caused climate change is real and happening. What is causing this, you might ask? People often interpret the same information very differently. As psychologists, we are more than familiar with the finding that our brains selectively attend to, process and recall information. One consequence of this is “confirmation bias,” a strong tendency to automatically favor information that supports our prior expectations. A recent Pew poll shows that there is a substantial and growing amount of public disagreement about When we consider issues that we feel strongly about (e.g., global warming), basic scientific facts, including human evolution, confirmation bias reaches a new height: it transitions into “motivated reasoning.” the safety of vaccines and whether or not human- caused climate change is real and happening. Motivated reasoning is the additional tendency to defensively reject information that Credit: Mikael Miettinen via flickr contradicts deeply held worldviews and opinions. One example of this is the “motivated rejection of science ”; if you are personally convinced that global warming is a hoax, you are likely to reject any scientific information to the contrary – regardless of its accuracy. Yet, if our personal values, beliefs and worldviews really dictate our reality, then aren’t science communicators just blowing in the wind? Not necessarily so. Although some research has indeed shown that factors such as “scientific literacy” are not always associated with, say, more concern for climate change, we have investigated a different, social type of fact: “expert consensus.” Our research shows that highlighting how many experts agree on a controversial issue has a far-reaching psychological influence. In particular, it has the surprising ability to “neutralize” polarizing worldviews and can lead to greater science acceptance. A recent study by one of us showed that perceived scientific consensus functions as an important “gateway belief.” In the experiment, we asked a national sample of the US population to participate in a public opinion poll about popular topics (participants did not know that the study was really about climate change). Participants were first asked to estimate what percentage of scientists they thought agree that human-caused climate change is happening (0 to 100 percent). We then exposed participants to a number of different experimental treatments that all contained the same basic message, that “ 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening. ” After several quizzes and bogus distractions, we finally asked participants again about their perception of the scientific consensus. You might expect that given the contested and politicized nature of the climate change problem, such a simple message would have little effect or could even backfire. Indeed, some research has shown that disagreements between parties can become more extreme when 1 of 3 6/15/2015 10:21 PM How to Combat Distrust of Science - Scientific American http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-combat-distrust-of-sci... exposed to the same evidence. Yet, contrary to the motivated-reasoning hypothesis, our results showed that on average, participants who were exposed to one of the consensus-messages increased their estimate of the consensus by about 13% (up to as much as 20% in some conditions). Moreover, we found that when respondents’ perception of the level of scientific agreement increased, this led to significant changes in other key beliefs about the issue, such as the belief that climate change is happening, human-caused and a worrisome problem. In turn, changes in these beliefs propelled an increase in support for public action. Thus, we found that people’s perception of the degree of scientific consensus seems to act as a “gateway” to other key attitudes about the issue. What’s even more interesting is that we found the same effect for two differentially motivated audiences: Democrats and Republicans. In fact, the change was significantly more pronounced among Republican respondents, who normally tend to be the most skeptical about the reality of human-caused climate change. These findings are quite remarkable, if not surprising, given that we exposed participants only once, to a single and simple message. Nonetheless, these new results are consistent with two previous Nature studies. Some years ago, our colleagues showed that people’s perception of the level of scientific agreement was associated with belief in climate change and policy support for the issue. A subsequent experimental study by one of us revealed a causal link between highlighting expert consensus and increased science acceptance. In that study, too, information about the degree of consensus “neutralized” the effect of ideological worldviews. Energy & Sustainability: 5 Steps to Feed the World and Sustain the Planet | Evolution: Archeologists Revive an Alcoholic Beverage from the Aztec Era (In Spanish) | Health: The Conflicted History of Alcohol in Western Civilization | Space: Molecules Reach Coldest Temperature Ever | Technology: Timeline: The Amazing Multimillion-Year History of Processed Food | More Science: The Flavor Connection Since then, numerous studies have reported similar results. One study showed that even a small amount of scientific dissent can undermine support for (environmental) policy. A new paper published just this month reported that respondents across the political spectrum responded positively to information about the scientific consensus on climate change. Why is “consensus-information” so far-reaching, psychologically speaking? One feature that clearly distinguishes “consensus” from other types of information is its normative nature. That is, consensus is a powerful descriptive social fact: it tells us about the number of people who agree on important issues (i.e., the norm within a community). Humans evolved living in social groups and much psychological research has shown that people are particularly receptive to social information. Indeed, consensus decision-making is widespread in human and non-human animals. Because decision-strategies that require widespread agreement lie at the very basis of the evolution of human cooperation, people may be biologically wired to pay attention to consensus-data. In the case of experts, it describes how many scientists agree on important issues and as such, implicitly embodies an authoritatively rich amount of information. Imagine reading a road sign that informs you that 97% of engineers have concluded that the bridge in front of you is unsafe to cross. You would likely base your decision to cross or avoid that bridge on the expert consensus, irrespective of your personal convictions. Few people would get out of their car and spend the rest of the afternoon personally assessing the structural condition of the bridge (even if you were an expert). Similarly, not everyone can afford the luxury of carving out a decade or so to study geophysics and learn how to interpret complex climatological data. Thus, it makes perfect sense for people to use expert consensus as a decision- heuristic to guide their beliefs and behavior. Society has evolved to a point where we routinely defer to others for advice—from our family doctors to car mechanics; we rely on experts to keep our lives safe and productive. Most of us are constrained by limited time and resources and reliance on consensus efficiently reduces the cost of individual learning. Back to facts. A recent study showed that people are more likely to cling onto their personal ideologies in the absence of “facts.” This suggests that in order to increase acceptance of science, we need more “facts.” We agree but suggest that this is particularly true for an underleveraged but psychologically powerful type of fact — expert consensus. The consensus on human-caused climate change is among the strongest observed in the sciences—about as strong as the consensus surrounding the link between smoking and lung cancer. Yet, as Harvard science historian Naomi Oreskes has documented , vested- interest groups have long understood the fact that people make (or fail to make) decisions based on consensus-information. 2 of 3 6/15/2015 10:21 PM How to Combat Distrust of Science - Scientific American http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-combat-distrust-of-sci... Accordingly, so-called “merchants of doubt” have orchestrated influential misinformation campaigns, including denials of the links between smoking and cancer,and between CO2 emissions and climate change. If polarization on science is to be reduced, we need to harness the psychological power of consensus for which it was designed: the public good. ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) Sander van der Linden is a postdoctoral research associate and lecturer at Princeton University. He is based in the Department of Psychology with joint appointments in the Woodrow Wilson School of Public Affairs and the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment. His research explores the psychology of risk, judgment and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Statistical Language Backs Conservatism in Climate-Change
    Forum Statistical Language Backs Conservatism in Climate-Change Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article-abstract/69/3/209/5382637 by United Nations Library Geneva user on 22 March 2019 Assessments SALVADOR HERRANDO-PÉREZ , COREY J. A. BRADSHAW , STEPHAN LEWANDOWSKY, AND DAVID R. VIEITES The scientific evidence for anthropogenic climate change is empirically settled, but communicating it to nonscientific audiences remains challenging. To be explicit about the state of knowledge on climate science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has adopted a vocabulary that ranks climate findings through certainty-calibrated qualifiers of confidence and likelihood. In this article, we quantified the occurrence of knowns and unknowns about “The Physical Science Basis” of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report by counting the frequency of calibrated qualifiers. We found that the tone of the IPCC’s probabilistic language is remarkably conservative (mean confidence is medium, and mean likelihood is 66%–100% or 0–33%), and emanates from the IPCC recommendations themselves, complexity of climate research, and exposure to politically motivated debates. Leveraging communication of uncertainty with overwhelming scientific consensus about anthropogenic climate change should be one element of a wider reform, whereby the creation of an IPCC outreach working group could enhance the transmission of climate science to the panel’s audiences. Keywords: climate change, communication, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, terminology, uncertainty ommunicating scientific and statistical uncertainty and finally we identify challenges and propose future direc- C to nonacademic audiences, including policymakers, tions that could bolster the IPCC’s communication strategy is one of the most important challenges of modern sci- and the public transmission of climate science as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • Topics: Misinformation and Conspiracy Theories About Politics and Public Policy
    PUBPOL 750.308: Topics: Misinformation and Conspiracy Theories about Politics and Public Policy Instructor: Prof. Brendan Nyhan Office: 4129 Weill Hall / 4408 ISR Classroom: 1210 Weill Hall Office hours: Thursday 9 AM{12 PM (Weill) Term: Winter 2019 (appts.: http://meetme.so/BrendanNyhan) Schedule: MW 2:30{3:50 PM Email: [email protected] \It is better to know less than to know so much that ain't so." {Josh Billings \A wise man should be humble enough to admit when he's wrong and change his mind based on new information." {Kanye West \Fearful Americans Stockpiling Facts Before Federal Government Comes To Take Them Away" {The Onion Overview of the course Why do people hold false or unsupported beliefs about politics and public policy and why are those beliefs so hard to change? This three-credit graduate course will explore the psychological factors that make people vulnerable to misinfor- mation and conspiracy theories and the reasons that corrections so often fail to change their minds. We will also analyze how those tendencies are exploited by political elites and consider possible approaches that journalists, civic reformers, and government officials could employ to combat misperceptions. Students will develop substantive expertise in how to measure, diagnose, and respond to false beliefs about politics and public policy; methodological expertise in reading and analyzing quantitative and experimental research in social science; and writing skills in preparing a policy memo making recommendations for how to address a prominent misperception and a final research paper analyzing the development of a specific misperception or conspiracy theory. Instructional approach Each class period will include a mix of lecture highlighting and expanding on key points from the readings and answering any questions about them, class discussion, and active learning exercises in which we critically examine the ideas introduced in the readings.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Pause' in Global Warming in Historical Context : (II). Comparing Models to Observations
    This is a repository copy of The 'pause' in global warming in historical context : (II). Comparing models to observations. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/142118/ Version: Published Version Article: Lewandowsky, Stephan, Cowtan, Kevin orcid.org/0000-0002-0189-1437, Risbey, James S. et al. (4 more authors) (2018) The 'pause' in global warming in historical context : (II). Comparing models to observations. Environmental Research Letters. 123007. ISSN 1748- 9326 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaf372 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. This licence allows you to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as you credit the authors for the original work. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Environmental Research Letters TOPICAL REVIEW • OPEN ACCESS Recent citations The ‘pause’ in global warming in historical context: - Influence and seepage: An evidence- resistant minority can affect public opinion (II). Comparing models to observations and scientific belief formation Stephan Lewandowsky et al To cite this article: Stephan Lewandowsky et al 2018 Environ. Res. Lett. 13 123007 - A fluctuation in surface temperature in historical context: reassessment and retrospective on the evidence James S Risbey et al View the article online for updates and enhancements.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Contagion of Infodemics & Conspiracy Theories
    A Global Contagion of Infodemics & Conspiracy Theories February 16, 2021 at 4:00pm Hawaii Speaker Biographies Amir ALI Assistant Professor of Political Science, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi, India Amir Ali is an assistant professor at the Centre for Political Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. He teaches courses in political theory and has interests in multiculturalism, group rights and political Islam. Previously, he taught at Jamia Millia Islamia University in New Delhi and was a visiting fellow at the University of Oxford. He is the author of the 2016 book South Asian Islam and British Multiculturalism (Routledge). His new book, Brexit and Liberal Democracy: Populism, Sovereignty and Nation-State will be out this year. Anna-Sophie HARLING Managing Director, Europe and Executive Vice President, NewsGuard, London, United Kingdom @asharling Anna-Sophie Harling is managing director, Europe and executive vice president of partnerships at NewsGuard, based in London and New York. In 2020, she was selected to serve as a member of the Content Board of Ofcom, the UK’s communications regulatory authority. Prior to joining NewsGuard, Ms. Harling worked as Business Development Manager for Lexoo, a technology company in London, and at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, an international law firm. She has previously worked at two German newspapers, Der Tagesspiegel and Märkische Allgemeine. Ms. Harling graduated from Yale University, where she was a Yale Journalism Scholar. Stephan LEWANDOWSKY Co-author, Conspiracy Theory Handbook; and Professor of Psychology and Chair of Cognitive Psychology, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom @STWorg Stephan Lewandowsky is a cognitive scientist at the University of Bristol.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals for the NINTH CIRCUIT ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ◆◆◆⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ COUNTY of SAN MATEO, No
    Case: 18-15499, 01/29/2019, ID: 11171856, DktEntry: 95, Page 1 of 51 Nos. 18-15499, 18-15502, 18-15503, 18-16376 United States Court Of Appeals FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ◆◆◆⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ ⎯ COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, No. 18-15499 Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 17-cv-4929-VC v. N.D. Cal., San Francisco CHEVRON CORPORATION, et al., Hon. Vince Chhabria Defendants-Appellants COUNTY OF IMPERIAL BEACH, No. 18-15502 Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 17-cv-4934-VC v. N.D. Cal., San Francisco CHEVRON CORPORATION, et al., Hon. Vince Chhabria Defendants-Appellants COUNTY OF MARIN, No. 18-15503 Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 17-cv-4935-VC v. N.D. Cal., San Francisco CHEVRON CORPORATION, et al., Hon. Vince Chhabria Defendants-Appellants COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, et al., No. 18-16376 Plaintiff-Appellee, Nos. 18-cv-00450-VC; v. 18-cv-00458-VC; CHEVRON CORPORATION, et al., 18-cv-00732-VC Defendants-Appellants N.D. Cal., San Francisco Hon. Vince Chhabria BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE ROBERT BRULE, CENTER FOR CLIMATE INTEGRITY, JUSTIN FARRELL, BENJAMIN FRANTA, STEPHAN LEWANDOWSKY, NAOMI ORESKES, and GEOFFREY SUPRAN IN SUPPORT OF APPELLEES AND AFFIRMANCE DANIEL P. MENSHER 1201 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3200 ALISON S. GAFFNEY SEATTLE, WA 98101-3052 KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. Tel: (206) 623-1900 Counsel for Amici Curiae Case: 18-15499, 01/29/2019, ID: 11171856, DktEntry: 95, Page 2 of 51 TABLE OF CONTENTS CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ......................................... 1 IDENTITY AND INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE ............................ 2 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1 I. DEFENDANTS HAD ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR FOSSIL FUEL PRODUCTS ................................................. 3 A. Defendants had early knowledge that fossil fuel products were causing an increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations, and that this increase could result in “catastrophic” consequences.
    [Show full text]
  • In Global Warming in Historical Context: - a Proposed Exogenous Cause of the Global Temperature Hiatus (II)
    Environmental Research Letters TOPICAL REVIEW • OPEN ACCESS Recent citations The ‘pause’ in global warming in historical context: - A Proposed Exogenous Cause of the Global Temperature Hiatus (II). Comparing models to observations Norman Treloar - Influence and seepage: An evidence- To cite this article: Stephan Lewandowsky et al 2018 Environ. Res. Lett. 13 123007 resistant minority can affect public opinion and scientific belief formation Stephan Lewandowsky et al - A fluctuation in surface temperature in historical context: reassessment and View the article online for updates and enhancements. retrospective on the evidence James S Risbey et al This content was downloaded from IP address 193.174.18.1 on 01/03/2019 at 11:09 Environ. Res. Lett. 13 (2018) 123007 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaf372 TOPICAL REVIEW The ‘pause’ in global warming in historical context: (II). Comparing OPEN ACCESS models to observations RECEIVED 6 February 2017 Stephan Lewandowsky1,2,3 , Kevin Cowtan4, James S Risbey3 , Michael E Mann5, Byron A Steinman6, REVISED Naomi Oreskes7 and Stefan Rahmstorf8,9 11 November 2018 1 University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION 2 23 November 2018 University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia 3 CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia PUBLISHED 4 Department of Chemistry, University of York, York, United Kingdom 19 December 2018 5 Department of Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, State College, United States of America 6 Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences and Large Lakes Observatory, University of Minnesota Duluth, Duluth, United States Original content from this of America work may be used under 7 Department of the History of Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States of America the terms of the Creative 8 Commons Attribution 3.0 Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam, D-14473, Germany licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Attitudes Towards Climate Change Are Mediated by Perceived Social Consensus
    Memory & Cognition (2019) 47:1445–1456 https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00948-y Science by social media: Attitudes towards climate change are mediated by perceived social consensus Stephan Lewandowsky1,2 · John Cook2,3 · Nicolas Fay2 · Gilles E. Gignac2 Published online: 21June2019 © The Author(s) 2019, corrected publication 2019 Abstract Internet blogs have become an important platform for the discussion of many scientific issues, including climate change. Blogs, and in particular the comment sections of blogs, also play a major role in the dissemination of contrarian positions that question mainstream climate science. The effect of this content on people’s attitudes is not fully understood. In particular, it is unknown how the interaction between the content of blog posts and blog comments affects readers’ attitudes. We report an experiment that orthogonally varied those two variables using blog posts and comments that either did, or did not, support the scientific consensus on climate change. We find that beliefs are partially shaped by readers’ perception of how widely an opinion expressed in a blog post appears to be shared by other readers. The perceived social consensus among readers, in turn, is determined by whether blog comments endorse or reject the contents of a post. When comments reject the content, perceived reader consensus is lower than when comments endorse the content. The results underscore the importance of perceived social consensus on opinion formation. Keywords Social media · Science communication · Online disinformation · Perceived consensus Americans are now as likely to resort to the Internet as their dynamic has changed the nature of information transfer, primary source of science information as they are to rely on with readers no longer just consuming content passively but television (Su, Akin, Brossard, Scheufele, & Xenos, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • 'Alice in Wonderland' Mechanics of the Rejection of (Climate) Science
    Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., & Lloyd, E. (2018). The ‘Alice in Wonderland’ mechanics of the rejection of (climate) science: simulating coherence by conspiracism. Synthese, 195(1), 175-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1198-6 Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record License (if available): CC BY Link to published version (if available): 10.1007/s11229-016-1198-6 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Springer Verlag at DOI: 10.1007/s11229-016-1198-. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ Synthese DOI 10.1007/s11229-016-1198-6 The ‘Alice in Wonderland’ mechanics of the rejection of (climate) science: simulating coherence by conspiracism Stephan Lewandowsky1,2 · John Cook2,3 · Elisabeth Lloyd4 Received: 18 February 2016 / Accepted: 4 August 2016 © The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Science strives for coherence. For example, the findings from climate sci- ence form a highly coherent body of knowledge that is supported by many independent lines of evidence: greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human economic activities are causing the global climate to warm and unless GHG emissions are drastically reduced in the near future, the risks from climate change will continue to grow and major adverse consequences will become unavoidable.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Misinformation: Understanding and Coping with The
    Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 6 (2017) 353–369 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition journa l homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jarmac Beyond Misinformation: Understanding and Coping with the “Post-Truth” Era ∗ Stephan Lewandowsky University of Bristol, United Kingdom University of Western Australia, Australia Ullrich K.H. Ecker University of Western Australia, Australia John Cook George Mason University, United States The terms “post-truth” and “fake news” have become increasingly prevalent in public discourse over the last year. This article explores the growing abundance of misinformation, how it influences people, and how to counter it. We examine the ways in which misinformation can have an adverse impact on society. We summarize how people respond to corrections of misinformation, and what kinds of corrections are most effective. We argue that to be effective, scientific research into misinformation must be considered within a larger political, technological, and societal context. The post-truth world emerged as a result of societal mega-trends such as a decline in social capital, growing economic inequality, increased polarization, declining trust in science, and an increasingly fractionated media landscape. We suggest that responses to this malaise must involve technological solutions incorporating psychological principles, an interdisciplinary approach that we describe as “technocognition.” We outline a number of recommendations to counter misinformation in a post-truth world. General Audience Summary Imagine a world that considers knowledge to be “elitist.” Imagine a world in which it is not medical knowledge but a free-for-all opinion market on Twitter that determines whether a newly emergent strain of avian flu is really contagious to humans.
    [Show full text]
  • The Consensus Handbook Why the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change Is Important
    The Consensus Handbook Why the scientific consensus on climate change is important John Cook Sander van der Linden Edward Maibach Stephan Lewandowsky Written by: John Cook, Center for Climate Change Communication, George Mason University Sander van der Linden, Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge Edward Maibach, Center for Climate Change Communication, George Mason University Stephan Lewandowsky, School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, and CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia First published in March, 2018. For more information, visit http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/all/consensus-handbook/ Graphic design: Wendy Cook Page 21 image credit: John Garrett Cite as: Cook, J., van der Linden, S., Maibach, E., & Lewandowsky, S. (2018). The Consensus Handbook. DOI:10.13021/G8MM6P. Available at http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/all/consensus-handbook/ Introduction Based on the evidence, 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human- caused climate change is happening. This scientific consensus has been a hot topic in recent years. It’s been referenced by presidents, prime ministers, senators, congressmen, and in numerous television shows and newspaper articles. However, the story of consensus goes back decades. It’s been an underlying theme in climate discussions since the 1990s. Fossil fuel groups, conservative think-tanks, and political strategists were casting doubt on the consensus for over a decade before social scientists began studying the issue. From the 1990s to this day, most of the discussion has been about whether there is a scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming. As the issue has grown in prominence, a second discussion has arisen. Should we even be talking about scientific consensus? Is it productive? Does it distract from other important issues? This handbook provides a brief history of the consensus on climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Oreskes CV FEB 2020
    Naomi Oreskes Professor of the History of Science Affiliated Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge MA [email protected] http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~hsdept/bios/oreskes.html Education B.Sc. (First Class Honours) 1981 Royal School of Mines, Imperial College Ph.D. 1990 Stanford University (Graduate Special Program: Geological Research and History of Science) EMPLOYMENT Current Professor of the History of Science, Affiliated Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University. Columnist, Scientific American magazine, “The Observatory” 2005-2013 Professor, Department of History & Program in Science Studies Adjunct Professor of Geosciences (from 2007), University of California, San Diego 2008-2011 Provost, Sixth College, University of California, San Diego 2003-2006 Director, Science Studies Program, University of California, San Diego 1998- 2005 Associate Professor, Department of History & Program in Science Studies, UCSD 1996-1998 Associate Professor, History and Philosophy of Science Gallatin School of Individualized Study, New York University 1991-1996 Assistant Professor of Earth Sciences and Adjunct Asst. Professor of History, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 1990-1991 Visiting Asst. Professor of Earth Sciences and Visiting Asst. Professor of History Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 1984-1989 Research Assistant, Geology Department, and Teaching Assistant, Depts. of Geology, Philosophy, and Applied Earth Sciences Stanford University 1981-1984 Geologist, Western Mining
    [Show full text]
  • Harnessing the Uncertainty Monster : Putting Quantitative Constraints on the Intergenerational Social Discount Rate
    This is a repository copy of Harnessing the uncertainty monster : Putting quantitative constraints on the intergenerational social discount rate. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/115794/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Lewandowsky, Stephan, Freeman, Mark Charles orcid.org/0000-0003-4521-2720 and Mann, Michael (2017) Harnessing the uncertainty monster : Putting quantitative constraints on the intergenerational social discount rate. Global and Planetary Change. pp. 155-166. ISSN 0921-8181 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2017.03.007 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Uncertainty and Social Discount Rates 1 Running head: UNCERTAINTY AND SOCIAL DISCOUNT RATES Harnessing the uncertainty monster: Putting quantitative constraints on the intergenerational social discount rate Stephan Lewandowsky University of Bristol and University of Western Australia Mark C.
    [Show full text]