Climate Denial is a Form of American Exceptionalism
Brian Kahn
Yesterday 4:20pm Filed to: AMERICA F*** YEAH
America is already great, my friends, at least when it comes to climate denial.
New research published this week in Nature Climate Change shows the U.S. is without peers when it comes to denying the basic science of climate change. Scientists surveyed people in 25 countries around the world, and found there’s no country quite like the U.S, where climate denial is much more closely tied to one’s political persuasion than any other country.
The researchers say this is actually a good thing, because it means there’s nothing inherent in conservative ideology that causes people to reject science…
The researchers say this is actually a good thing, because it means there’s nothing inherent in conservative ideology that causes people to reject science…
That’s right… Nothing inherent in conservative or libertarian ideology causes people to reject science… If It did, I wouldn’t be a geologist… And I’m guessing that Anthony wouldn’t be a meteorologist and that quite a few other scientists wouldn’t be scientists either. And… No one denies the climate. I’m fairly certain that “climate denial” is both grammatically and physically impossible.
And… What the frack does HurricaneSuperstormFranknestorm Post Tropical Cyclone Sandy have to do with climate change? [1][2]
Conservative/libertarian scientists simply reject “science” as it is defined by liberal social justice warriors. From a previous post of mine…
The ARS Technica article includes a graph from the paper:
“As scientific literacy goes up to the right, conservatives are equally likely to know what scientists have concluded and less likely to believe that themselves.”
Firstly, this does not demonstrate “a big gap between what scientists understand and what the public thinks it knows.” The two panels in the graph comprise a non sequitur to that “big gap.” The first panel has nothing to do with the supposed scientific consensus on climate change (Humans are responsible for more than half of the warming since 1950). This is as bad as Doran & Kendall Zimmerman in its flawed logical reasoning. Accepting the assertion that humans are primarily responsible for climate change does not follow from knowing that carbon dioxide is a so-called greenhouse gas.
As a professional geologist, I know the answer to the first question is “carbon dioxide” and the answer to the second question is “mostly because of natural patterns in the Earth’s environment.” There is no logical requirement for the first answer to lead to “mostly because of human activity such as burning fossil fuels.”
Oddly enough, Doran & Kendall Zimmerman found that a majority of academic & government economic geologists agree with me (they only surveyed academic & government scientists.”
It should come as little surprise that geoscientists have consistently been far more likely to think that modern climate changes have been driven by overwhelmingly natural processes. A survey of APEGA, the organization responsible for certifying and licensing professional geoscientists and engineers in Alberta, found that 64% of geoscientists rejected the so-called consensus for various reasons, with climate change being overwhelmingly natural leading the pack.
This study is very interesting because it analyzes the frames of reference (Kuhn’s “different worlds”) in which opinions are formed. Skeptical geologists are most likely to view climate change as overwhelmingly natural. Skeptical engineers are more likely to view it as a matter of economics or fatalism. The cost of decarbonization would far outweigh any benefits and/or would have no measurable effect on climate change.
None of which is ideologically driven, unless there are some unseen forces that drive conservatives into geology and/or engineering… Or something about geology and engineering that drives the practitioners towards conservatism and/or libertarianism. I know that having real jobs, paying beaucoup taxes and having to cut through government red tape, just to do our jobs, certainly could be a motivating factor… The AAPG doesn’t conduct political surveys of its membership, but one company, Seismic Micro-Technology (SMT), did conduct an unscientific survey during the 2008 AAPG convention and found that, “geoscientists are a politically diverse group of people, with no disproportionate representation for any political party.” They also found that 47% of respondents agreed “that human factors are primarily driving global warming.” 36% disagreed and 17% were undecided or unsure. So, the AAPG members who visited SMT’s booth and took the survey probably skewed to the left a bit and SMT’s reporting of the survey seems a bit biased as well:
A minority (37%) of all respondents disagree that human factors are primarily
driving global warming – but political affiliation polarizes opinion
57% of conservatives reject the consensus view, versus 27% of liberals.
Independents align with liberals – with only 30% rejecting the consensus view.
Political views are more telling here than age, as both Under 45 and Over 45 show pluralities believing in human causes.
A minority, 46%, agreed with the consensus. 54% did not agree with the consensus. 37% disagreed and 17% were unsure.
Putting the AGI, AAPG, APEGA surveys together reveals the following:
Climate change primarily driven by human activities
Reject
Unsure
Endorse
Doran & Kendall-Zimmerman
AGI
53%
0%
47%
Lefsfrud & Meyer
APEGA
40%
33%
27%
Seismic Micro-Technology
AAPG
37%
17%
46%
Average
43%
17%
40%
Standard Deviation
9%
17%
11%
Reject so-called consensus 43% (±9%)
Unsure 17% (±17%)
Endorse so-called consensus 40% (±11%)
All three of these surveys were conducted in or around 2008. Lefsfrud & Meyer was a 2013 reanalysis of a 2008 survey.
While ideology certainly appears to be a factor in scientifically literate disagreement with the so-called consensus, geoscientists clearly fall short of 97% in their endorsement of it.
Yet, Dr. Timmer (a molecular biologist and flaming liberal Democrat) dismisses scientifically literate rejection of the so called consensus with quips like, “a little knowledge is a problem” and “for those on the wrong side of an ideological divide, scientific knowledge hurts.” It appears that he would prefer a scientifically illiterate society in which we would all just bow down to “science” and do what we’re told to do.
Conclusion
If scientifically literate conclusions regarding the causes of climate change are primarily driven by political ideology… The climate science is settled: It’s not science.
References
[1] Doran, Peter T.; Maggie Kendall Zimmerman (January 20, 2009). “Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change” (PDF). EOS. 90 (3): 22–23.
Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. PNAS 2017 ; published ahead of print August 21, 2017, doi:10.1073/pnas.1704882114
[3] Lefsrud, L. M.; Meyer, R. E. (2012). “Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change”. Organization Studies. 33 (11): 1477. doi:10.1177/0170840612463317
If scientifically literate conclusions regarding the causes of climate change are primarily driven by political ideology… The climate science is settled: It’s not science.
The Earther article refers to the same psychobabble study that Eric Worrall skewered in this post.
00votes
Article Rating
395 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chad Jessup
May 11, 2018 1:51 pm
It was interesting to read Lief’s perspectives on a few issues which were different from his normal excellent commentary on solar matters. I would point out that illegal immigration is favored by those who desire to exploit cheap labor, people who cannot stand up for themselves in the legal system and thus lack the protections thereof. This is one of the reasons Senator John McCain favors open borders.
The employers of illegal immigrants mostly don’t pay employer mandated taxes on that illegal labor. The nation’s unemployment rate would even be lower if employer’s followed the law. It’s a shame the MSM has brain-washed so many liberals about this sad matter.
The Latinos are overwhelmingly hard working, conscientious employees, and it would be better for them to be legal immigrants.
Here are some amusing commonly held American beliefs and suspicions as of 80 years ago, courtesy of Mencken and Nathan:
American Credo:
That when one takes one’s best girl to see the monkeys in the zoo, the monkeys invariably do something that is very embarrassing.
That Professor Garner is able to carry on long and intimate conversations with monkeys in their own language.
That each year a man volunteers to take his children to the circus merely as a subterfuge to go himself.
That ginger snaps are made of the sweepings of the floor in the bakery.
That the licorice candy sold in cheap candy stores is made of old rubber boots.
That all the antique furniture sold in America is made in Grand Rapids, Mich., and that the holes testifying to its age are made either with gimlets or by trained worms.
That the Navajo blankets sold to trans-continental tourists by the Indians on the station platform at Albuquerque, New Mexico, are made by the Elite Novelty M’f’g. Co. of Passaic, N.J., and are bought by the Indians in lots of 1,000.
That newspaper reporters hear, every day, a great many thumping scandals that they fail to print, and that they refrain through considerations of honor.
That all girls educated in convents turn out in later life to be hell-raisers.
That when a play is given in an insane asylum the inmates always laugh at the tragic moments and cry at the humorous moments.
That when Washington crossed the Delaware, he stood up in the bow of the boat holding aloft a large American flag.
That the winters in the United States are a good deal less cold than they used to be, and that the change has been caused by the Gulf Stream.
It was interesting to read Lief’s perspectives on a few issues which were different from his normal excellent commentary on solar matters. I would point out that illegal immigration is favored by those who desire to exploit cheap labor, people who cannot stand up for themselves in the legal system and thus lack the protections thereof. This is one of the reasons Senator John McCain favors open borders.
The employers of illegal immigrants mostly don’t pay employer mandated taxes on that illegal labor. The nation’s unemployment rate would even be lower if employer’s followed the law. It’s a shame the MSM has brain-washed so many liberals about this sad matter.
The Latinos are overwhelmingly hard working, conscientious employees, and it would be better for them to be legal immigrants.
+42
+What is 6 times 9
Here are some amusing commonly held American beliefs and suspicions as of 80 years ago, courtesy of Mencken and Nathan: