This looks interesting. Skeptical Science has introduced a Firefox add-on which enables an internet surfer to rapidly check out the arguments found on web pages and blogs. Great for those without a specialist knowledge in the area of climate science. So much of this information on the internet is distorted or downright wrong. This could save the interested surfer the time and effort required to research claims for themselves.
As the image above shows the report includes information on the real science. I can see people wishing to place comments at an offending blog using this feature.
The add-on also enables interested surfers to make their own reports on blogs and web pages. Those supporting the science as well as the offending ones.
This will provide a chance for the more interested surfer to contribute information and links to the Daily Climate Links email and Global Warming Links page. A chance to contribute to a very useful resource.
Go to Skeptical Science Firefox Add-on: Send and receive climate info while you browse for more information on the add-on. Looks like it could be fun.
You can download the SkS Firefox Add-on at Skeptical Science 1.0.
See also: Get your climate change science on the run for details of Skeptic Science’s iPhone and ipod Touch application. Another useful way of checking our the science of climate change.
Posted in environment, Environment and Ecology, SciBlogs, science, Science and Society
Tagged Climate, climate change, Climatology, Environment, global warming, SciBlogs, Skeptical Science
Book Review: Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the Truth About Climate Change by Clive Hamilton
Price: USD$16.47; AUD $24.99; NZD$29.99
Hardcover: 240 pages
Publisher: Earthscan Publications Ltd. (May 2010); Allen & Unwin (March 2010)
# ISBN-13: 978-1849710817
I think this book has three messages, but two of them resonated strongly with me. Effectively these are the title and subtitle.
The problems presented by global warming are so large we may never solve them (hence Requiem for a Species – us). The more I discover about the science of climate change the more I become aware that if we don’t take protection measures soon the results for our species will be dramatic.
Socially and psychologically we want to deny the problem (Hence Why we Resist the Truth About Climate change). Psychological and sociologically, as individuals and collectively, we are in denial. This inhibits our capacity to take the actions needed to protect us from the results of human induced climate change.
Those messages come through strongly. The third message, ideas and suggestions for getting us out of these problems is far weaker, probably because it is less specific.
I have been interested in scientific misconduct recently – partly as a result of the Hauser scandal. Consequently I was reading about a recent conference on the subject. The documents included plagiarism right up there with the more commonly accepted forms of misconduct like falsification of evidence.
Plagiarism is the use of text from others’ writing without attribution. Now I realised that this was a big issue for student assessment at universities but apparently it is also an issue for scientific journals. Many journals now use a computer programme to check out submitted papers for plagiarized content.
Just imagine, though, there is a whole field of scientific publishing where such things would not be routinely checked. I am referring to popular science articles, newspaper articles – and reports to clients, including governments.
Well, the proverbial seems to be hitting the fan for one such report – the Wegman report. Gareth at Hot Topic briefly reports this in his article Wegman investigated for plagiarism, “skepticgate” looms.
Posted in Environment and Ecology, SciBlogs, science, Science and Society
Tagged climate change, denier, Environment, global warming, Hockey stick controversy, Ian Wishart, John Mashey, Michael Mann, Plagiarism, Raymond Bradley, SciBlogs, Scientific misconduct
Here’s an opportunity for New Zealanders to hear an international expert talk about the economics of climate change, policies for adaption and mitigation and the issues involved in obtaining a global agreement on these.
The Sir Douglas Robb Lectures 2010 are to be presented by Lord Nicholas Stern next week.
Formerly Chief Economist of the World Bank, Lord Stern is IG Patel Professor of Economics and Government and Chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Posted in Environment and Ecology, human rights, New Zealand, politics, SciBlogs, science, Science and Society
Tagged Auckland University, climate change, Economics, Environment, global warming, London School of Economics, Stern Review, Victoria University of Wellington, World Bank
Local blog Imperator Fish has a nice little satirical comment on the impending legal case being taken against NIWA by New Zealand critics of climate change science (see A desperate plea to be noticed?). If They Win is a fictional news report of legal action taken by the Climate Science Coalition (CSC) alleging breach of a court order that ruled climate change was not occurring. That is it assumes the CSC will be successful in its current case.
The CSC sued the Crown Research Institute NIWA over weather data issued by the institute, and obtained a ruling by the court last year that NIWA’s data was invalid.
But the CSC are concerned that global temperatures may have risen, in defiance of the court order.
CSC spokesman Terry Dunleavy said the recent atmospheric activity was concerning.
“It may just be an anomaly, but we would certainly be very concerned if temperatures were on the rise, in defiance of the judge’s order.”
Problem is who is responsible? Who do they sue now?
Auckland University Associate Law Professor Nigel de Blath said it was not absolutely clear who or what was behind the recent temperature changes. But if it was God He may have a case to answer.
“On the face of it He appears to have breached the spirit of the court order, if not the actual express language of it.
“I think we all accepted when the ruling came out last year that climate change was at an end. The judge made his views very clear on the subject.”
Mr de Blath said the latest temperature anomalies made a mockery of the entire judicial process.
I nice little story, illustrating the stupidity of thinking one should take legal action in an attempt to change reality.
Posted in New Zealand, politics, SciBlogs, science, Science and Society
Tagged Climate, climate change, Crown Research Institute, deniers, Environment, global warming, humour, law, New Zealand
Quite a few local bloggers* have commented on the legal action some New Zealand climate deniers are taking to get NIWA to change its national temperature record. This is only the latest step in a nasty little campaign by these people to deny the reality of climate change. Nasty because it distorts the data and facts and makes outrageous attacks on the integrity and honesty of New Zealand scientists. The latest step – but I do wonder if it is the last step – seeing it is likely to backfire.Initially this campaign attempted to take advantage of the “climategate” email hysteria to whip up local anti-science feelings. Of late, as this hysteria has dispersed the local deniers have deteriorated to a small but vocal clique making carping and dishonest attacks on NIWA. I guess they see this legal action as a way of somehow revitalising their campaign.
Posted in Environment and Ecology, New Zealand, politics, SciBlogs, science, Science and Society
Tagged climate change, Environment, global warming, Massey University, New Zealand, NIWA, peer review, University of Canterbury
I am currently reading Clive Hamilton‘s book “Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the Truth About Climate Change.” This figure in the book intrigued me. It’s taken from the report Global Warming’s Six Americas: An Audience Segmentation Analysis.
I think this demonstrates clearly that much of the public debate on climate change is politically based. Too often the real issue for those who argue against the science of climate change is political or ideological. The actions required to deal with climate change are seen as a threat to “free enterprise” because they require collective action to restrain the self-interest of individuals.
I just wish people with these concerns would be honest and stop trying to discredit the science and the scientists. After all, one can’t change reality, and it is only sensible to deal with the real issues. To deal with the politics. As I argued in Liability of scientific denialism to political conservativism attempts to discredit the science are really only a cop-out from the real political issues.
By the way – you shouldn’t read the wrong things into the above figure. The data is simply displaying the proportion of each classification (Alarmed, to Dismissive) who were liberal or conservative. “Moderates” are not shown hence the totals are less than 100. The figure does not indicate what proportion of the population is in each classification.
Another figure from this report gives this information (see below). As you can see only a small proportion of the American population is dismissive or doubtful about climate change.
I have often thought that political conservatives who promote climate change denial are cutting off their nose to spite their face. Sure, I can understand why conservatives may be opposed to collective action required to deal with the problem of global warming. Or at least some of the political and economic measures that have been discussed. But if they are serious about their political and ideological stance, and their desire to promote it, they should be in there debating the adaption and mitigation procedures that have been advanced. Or advancing some of their own.
Instead, they choose to leave themselves “outside the tent pissing in,” when they avoid the political process taking place and instead claim there is no need.
Posted in diversity, New Zealand, politics, SciBlogs, science, Science and Society
Tagged climate change, climate change deniers, Environment, global warming, Jonathan Kay, National Post
Here is a podcast for those who want to follow the latest news and events involving climate science and the activity of those who wish to deny the scientific consensus. Irregular Climate is hosted by Dan Moutal* and Graham Wayne*. Currently it has reached six episodes and appears to aim for a weekly appearance. The web site includes show notes which appear quite useful with extra diagrams and videos.
I have listened to all six episodes and found it useful. I am happy to recommend it. So try it out.
*About Dan Moutal: He lives in Vancouver, ofdan.ca is his website. He has a blog, tweets, and occasionally takes some pretty pictures.
*About Graham Wayne: He is a writer and journalist, does a little IT work, drawing on his corporate background as CIO of a group of companies, and composes and records music. He blogs at gpwayne.wordpress.com