- Published on Sunday, 23 June 2013 21:26
Dr. Tim Ball's Website
Items mentioned in (or otherwise relevant to) the interview
"The "97% consensus" article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country that the energy minister should cite it. It offers a similar depiction of the world into categories of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to that adopted in Anderegg et al.’s 2010 equally poor study in PNAS: dividing publishing climate scientists into ‘believers’ and ‘non-believers’. It seems to me that these people are still living (or wishing to live) in the pre-2009 world of climate change discourse. Haven’t they noticed that public understanding of the climate issue has moved on?" (emphasis added)
(The orginal comment can be viewed here: http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/makingsciencepublic/2013/07/23/whats-behind-the-battle-of-received-wisdoms/)
Podcast theme music: "Hide the Decline" is copyright © Minnesotans for Global Warming, and used here with kind permission.
Slideshow image: "Mad Men of Climate-Change Alarmism" is copyright © Josh, and used here with kind permission.