The American Chemical Society decides to put themselves into the climate communications business.
From their press release:
Understanding climate science: A scientist’s responsibility to communicate with the public
NEW ORLEANS, April 8, 2013 — With global climate change and the prospect of another record-hot summer on the minds of millions of people, experts have gathered here today to encourage scientists to take a more active role in communicating the topic to the public, policy makers and others. The symposium, “Understanding Climate Science: A Scientist’s Responsibility,” is part of the 245th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS), the world’s largest scientific society.
Speakers are highlighting a new resource that scientists can use in communicating the science of climate change. Launched late last year, the ACS Climate Science Toolkit, available at http://www.acs.org/climatescience, is a web-based tool to enhance understanding and communication of the science underpinning global climate change. The toolkit was developed for ACS’ more than 163,000 members and others. Abstracts related to the symposium are at the end of this release.
The project, more than a year in development, was one of the major initiatives that Bassam Z. Shakhashiri, Ph.D., 2012 ACS president, put forth for his year in office. Shakhashiri, the William T. Evjue Distinguished Chair for the Wisconsin Idea at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, described the toolkit as a unique resource, with a sharp focus on the scientific concepts that determine Earth’s climate.
“The ACS Climate Science Toolkit fills a need for education and equips scientists with the information and other resources necessary to develop a robust intellectual structure to communicate on this key topic,” said Shakhashiri. “Climate change affects everyone and everything on Earth, and ranks as one of the greatest global challenges of the early 21st century.”
Shakhashiri explained that the ACS is among the major scientific organizations with position statements acknowledging the reality of climate change and recommending action. The ACS policy statement mentions that people need a basic understanding of climate science in order to make informed personal decisions. And it describes climate change education for the public as “essential.” Not explicit in the statement, however, is the responsibility of individual ACS members to take active roles in this education process as both scientists and citizens.
“Scientist-citizens must use their expertise and credibility as scientists ― as the ACS Mission Statement expresses so eloquently ― ‘…for the benefit of Earth and its people,'” Shakhashiri added. “Recruiting individual scientists to take on this responsibility requires encouragement and exhortation. It also requires providing convenient access to reliable tools for doing so.”
The ACS Climate Science Toolkit discusses greenhouse gases, how the Earth’s heating mechanism works, how the vibrational energy from molecules changes into translational kinetic energy and much more. The toolkit also provides a package of “Climate Science Narratives” that can be adapted and personalized when scientists have the opportunity to speak about climate science to other audiences. Those may include students, schoolteachers, college and university faculty, industrial scientists and business leaders, civic and religious groups, professional science and educational organizations, and elected public officials at all levels and in all branches of government.
Work on the toolkit began in 2011, when Shakhashiri formed the ACS Presidential Working Group on Climate Science, a panel of distinguished scientists and science communicators chaired by physical chemist and science educator Jerry A. Bell, Ph.D. The panel worked on two tasks. One was to develop a toolkit that ACS members and others could use for self-education on climate science, to understand the fundamental chemical and physical processes that determine Earth’s climate. The second was an ongoing task of developing strategies for using the toolkit in communicating about climate change to other audiences.
The Dec. 3, 2012, edition of Chemical & Engineering News, ACS’ weekly newsmagazine, contains a Comment article at http://cenm.ag/climatescience in which Shakhashiri discusses the toolkit and its importance.
Members of the working group:
- Bassam Z. Shakhashiri, Ph.D., William T. Evjue Distinguished Chair for the Wisconsin Idea, the University of Wisconsin-Madison
- Jerry A. Bell, Ph.D., working group chair, the University of Wisconsin-Madison
- Joseph S. Francisco, Ph.D., William E. Moore Distinguished Professor of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences and Chemistry, Purdue University
- Peter Mahaffy, Ph.D., King’s University College in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, and co-director of the King’s Centre for Visualization in Science
- Kathleen M. Schulz, Ph.D., president of Business Results Inc., Albuquerque, N.M., and a member of the ACS Board of Directors
- Susan Solomon, Ph.D., Ellen Swallow Richards Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- John Wiesenfeld, Ph.D., professor emeritus at Florida Atlantic University
- Rudy M. Baum, consultant, former editor-in-chief of Chemical & Engineering News
- Barbara J. Finlayson-Pitts, Ph.D., consultant, University of California-Irvine
- Mario J. Molina, Ph.D., consultant, University of California-San Diego
- Michael Woods, ACS staff liaison, assistant director, science communications, ACS Office of Public Affairs
- Katie Cottingham, Ph.D., ACS staff liaison, senior science writer, science communications, ACS Office of Public Affairs
- Darcy Gentleman, Ph.D., ACS staff liaison, ACS Science & the Congress Project, ACS Office of Public Affairs
An editorial on this topic appears in the current edition of Science, the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, at http://www.sciencemag.org/content/340/6128/9.full.pdf.
###
The American Chemical Society is a nonprofit organization chartered by the U.S. Congress. With more than 163,000 members, ACS is the world’s largest scientific society and a global leader in providing access to chemistry-related research through its multiple databases, peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences. Its main offices are in Washington, D.C., and Columbus, Ohio.
To automatically receive news releases from the American Chemical Society, contact newsroom@acs.org.
Note to journalists: Please report that this research was presented at a meeting of the American Chemical Society. Follow us: Twitter | Facebook
Abstracts
ACS climate science toolkit
1. Jerry A. Bell1, Ph.D., American Chemical Society, 1155 16th St., Washington, DC, 20036, United States, 202-872-9734, j_bell@acs.org
Scientists have a responsibility to help non-scientists understand a science-based issue like global climate change, even if they are not in a field directly related to climate science. The good news is that a great deal of excellent material on climate science, most often associated with global climate change, is available from print and electronic resources. The bad news is that there is so much available that it is a daunting task to know where to begin to learn enough to be helpful to others. An ACS Presidential Climate Science Working Group has developed a concise, web-based Climate Science Toolkit designed to engage ACS members in learning the fundamentals of climate science so those who take on their responsibility to the public have an entry point to the depth of material available to learn more. In this presentation we will examine the principles that guided development of the Toolkit and how it might be used.
Baffled by climate change? New interactive tools demystify the science behind climate change
1. Peter Mahaffy1, Ph.D., The King’s University College, Chemistry Department, 9125 50th St, Edmonton, AB, T6B 2H3, Canada, 780-465-3500, peter.mahaffy@kingsu.ca
What’s different about the climate change we are experiencing now, relative to the many changes in earth’s climate in the past? Can’t the oceans absorb the extra CO2 that humans are putting into the atmosphere? Is it true that laughing gas contributes to climate change? And do we need to worry about a runaway greenhouse effect from methane clathrate hydrates? The challenges seem enormous – is there anything I can do that could possibly make a difference? In this talk, we introduce a comprehensive set of interactive, web-based tools that will help you answer these and many other questions, and make connections between fundamental concepts in chemistry and the science of climate change. Learn more about the materials at http://www.explainingclimatechange.com, created as a legacy of the International Year of Chemistry by the team at the King’s Centre for Visualization in Science (http://www.kcvs.ca) in partnership with IUPAC, UNESCO, RSC and ACS.
Air pollution and climate change: Integrating lessons from the past
1. Barbara J. Finlayson-Pitts1, Ph.D., University California Irvine, Department of Chemistry, 328 Rowland Hall, Irvine, CA, 92697-2025, United States, 949- 824-7670, bjfinlay@uci.edu
Air pollution and climate are very closely intertwined in many ways, including the science behind them. However, the connection between them is often not recognized, hindering the translation of what we have learned from one to the other. Examples of their interconnectedness and what we can learn from this will be discussed. In addition, a successful summer workshop for high school teachers designed to provide the fundamental chemistry behind air pollution and climate will be described.
Climate communication from a science perspective
1. Richard C.J. Somerville1, Ph.D., Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, Dept. 0224, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0224, United States, 858-534-4644, rsomerville@ucsd.edu
Scientists as a group are widely admired and can often use their prestige as well as their technical knowledge to advantage in publicizing and illuminating the findings of climate science. However, most scientists are unaware of the main obstacles to effective communication, such as the distrust that arises when the scientist and the audience do not have a shared worldview and shared cultural values. Many climate scientists also fail to realize that their jargon and specialized terminology are significant barriers to communication, and that their messages require skilled translation into understandable everyday language. The people whom one is trying to reach are rarely hungry for pure scientific information, but instead want to know how climate change will affect them, and especially what can be done about it.
Communication and climate science
1. Kathleen M. Schulz1, Ph.D., Business Results, Inc., 12704 Sandia Ridge Place NE, Albuquerque, NM, 87111, United States, 505-856-9227, kschulz@comcast.net
Understanding science is vital, communicating science equally so. Scientists have a responsibility to communicate effectively.
Understanding Climate Science Change
(Rudy Baum, abstract not yet available)
=============================================================
On the plus side, I have expected to find some of the junk from the “Skeptical Science” website tossed in there. Thankfully, there is none. – Anthony
I can tell they are having a hard time communicating to people that this dire emergency that doesn’t actually seem to be happening is so important that we must surrender all our money and power to them.
Hey, wait, do you think maybe they just want the money and power?
****
Alexander K says:
April 8, 2013 at 2:03 pm
Susan Solomon’s name on the masthead is enough to make me wonder about the initiative!
****
Me too. Saved me from wasting time reading the dreck.
Scientific societies are dominated by academia. Academia is dominated by a drive for funding. Perceived big dangerous problems drive big funding. Therefore scientific societies will strive to create perceived big dangerous problems. Quite logical, actually, though not very scientific.
I’m sure that while they’re on their visit to New Orleans (most of them on the taxpayer’s dime), they will turn off their air conditioners, walk everywhere they go, and not eat any meat.
As a chemist, I take the opportunity to communicate the science of climate change at every opportunity. I think that I can manage quite well without the use of the toolkit though.
Physics Major says:
April 8, 2013 at 2:10 pm
I think they arrived at the party just as it’s breaking up.
Yep, bad timing indeed. And about this communication thing…what do they think all the media and schools have been doing the last twenty years? We’ve been beat over the head constantly for years upon years and they think maybe we haven’t heard about it or thought about it?
I know, let’s get a bigger stick to hit them over the head with, that will work!
ACS cannot communicate effectively to persuade people that man-made global warming is a problem. True believers will believe, no matter what evidence and arguments are presented.
Realists, and skeptics, will dismiss any pronouncements by ACS as merely more argument from authority.
Nature does not recognize authority.
What realists should be watching are the irrefutable facts of a long winter and very late spring snows and associated cold weather. As an example, Nebraska (USA) farmers would normally be planting crops by April 8. This year, though, the farmers are enduring yet another snow storm. The storm is expected to last two or three days and delay planting by two or three weeks.
So, as a former member of ACS, I challenge the ACS: bray as loud and long as you like about the imminent perils of man-made climate change. See how much difference that makes to thousands of farmers who cannot plant their crops until the snow melts and the soil warms adequately.
The sunspots are few, the solar cycle is at its peak, the oceans are cooling, and northern hemisphere Spring is later than usual. No amount of bleating by ACS can get around those facts. The cooling has begun.
ACS motto, follow the money. Go to where the grants are (have been). In very few years, we’ll see an ACS meeting topic on “why have scientists lost credibility” – yes it was due to warming.
Instead of a toolkit, why don’t they put together a package of their unassailable data and hand that out? No? Too hard?
johanna says:
April 8, 2013 at 2:05 pm
Yes, Johanna, CAGW evangelists. Can science sink lower than misguided evangelism? Look below.
“The toolkit also provides a package of “Climate Science Narratives” that can be adapted and personalized when scientists have the opportunity to speak about climate science to other audiences.”
Propaganda pieces that you can integrate into your own life and then your own community. Not a word about the role of scientist as skeptic or critic. Yes, scientists can fall lower than misguided evangelism. The honest thing would be to admit that they are promoting a religion.
“kim” said this over at Judith Curry’s. It should be a mantra.
All climatology is divided into two classes, those trying to understand it and those trying to explain it. Those trying to explain it are at a lethal disadvantage, because they don’t understand it.
I am awaiting the scientific societies I am a member of to play this game… just once, and they’ll kiss my membership fee good bye.
I didn’t read any downside to AGW.
did I miss it?
cn
Kind of sad to see the continuing lefty take-over of a once fine professional society.
They got the majority of the universities and school systems, the professional societies, the MSM and now the federal government. Once they get the energy sector turn out the lights the party is over!
The University of Western Australia has an article out ‘planetary tipping point debunked’, a surprise considering it’s also the home of the ‘Lew-paper’. http://pindanpost.com/2013/04/09/what-planetary-tipping-point/
I dropped my membership years ago when they went political. They have nothing to do with science and are an insult to chemistry and science.
Who cares? To deploy one of the standard arguments used by followers of “the Cause”, these people are not “climate scientists”, so why bother listening to them?
Here are the most fundamental things that scientists must ‘educate’ themselves about:
1. How do we measure temperature, have we measured it consistently and accurately for long enough to draw scientific conclusions which will stand the test of time?
2. Do we understand the oscillations of ocean temperature on a global scale and have we been studying it long enough to draw scientific conclusions which will stand the test of time?
3. Do we understand how the energy of the sun enters the energy system of the earth and its atmosphere and how such entry and exit affects our climate?
4. Do we understand yet what ‘natural variability of climate’ means in different geographical locations?
5. Do scientists dispassionately report the truth or communicate with one or both eyes on how to maintain or increase their funding packages?
6. Is the funding for climate science research dispassionate or loaded with political calculations, chicaneries and prejudice?
7. Do appropriate checks and balances exist in the climate organisations which purport to represent humanity?
8. How easy is it for scientists of any discipline to express their considered views truthfully and dispassionately without placing threat upon their own research funding streams?
9. If the answer to 8) is ‘almost impossible’, why do the authors of this paper think that any scientist would want to answer their call?
10. When scientists’ careers are grossly affected by anything other than scientific rigour and analysis, why does anyone expect them to behave like scientists when speaking about highly charged political matters??
Spouting IPCC mantras is not ‘educating themselves’, any more than squealing ‘ice age, ice age’ for no good reason is.
Educating yourself is about assuming, until proven otherwise, that everything anyone says, no matter their reputation, power or prior track record, is inaccurate bullshit.
It is about saying ‘if I believe in John Christy’s research, it’s because I can’t find any flaws in it. If I agree with his political submissions, it is because, after sifting the competing claims, I find his approach to be broadly in the interests of my country.’
Or the like, naming whoever you choose to name for whatever reason you choose to name them.
Well, Theo, they are starting to sound increasingly like those irritating party-plan people. This is good news, overall. Those of us who have been exposed to party-plan pushers in our immediate circle know just how off-putting that is.
Whatsupwiththat is used as a reference here
http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_SUPERARTICLE&node_id=857&use_sec=false&sec_url_var=region1&__uuid=c288d1ae-5cbe-485d-992e-7e813396f0d4
” With global climate change and the prospect of another record-hot summer on the minds of millions of people…” I stopped reading right there… sorry.
That isn’t what is on my mind… what is on my mind is the fact that it has been a long, cold, snowy winter in the Northern Hemisphere, and for many places, Spring still seems a long way off… it is April 9th, and there are Winter Storm Warnings across a big chunk of the US today…
The trend toward a colder world is what is on my mind!
Sorry, Moon; inadequate understanding on your part the way EM energy behaves. Do you think the molecule just ‘holds it in’ (the energy) and releases it at some random time later? That’s NOT the way it works, the re-rad is a CONTINUOUS process, the amount of time passing before a collision occurs with anther molecule being the RANDOM variable …
.
“With global climate change and the prospect of another record-hot summer on the minds of millions of people”
I’m in Britain and what’s been on my mind for over a month now is “one will the Winter end!”. As far as climate is concerned I find myself thinking “The sun is high in the sky now its April. Why is it so damn cold??? Is the sun going out?”
“the prospect of another record-hot summer”
Right now, the UK will take any kind of summer it can get. Can we sue for ’emotional distress’ if the forecasts are wrong again?