From cartoonist to that’s Dr. Cartoonist to you!~cr
News Release 3-Dec-2019
New game builds resilience against misinformation; ‘inoculates’ users against fake news on climate change; gamifies critical thinking
George Mason University
A George Mason University scientist is developing a mobile game that will teach users to defend themselves from ‘fake news’ on climate change.
ProfessorJohn Cook, an expert on misinformation with Mason’s Center for Climate Change Communication, has launched a crowdfunding campaign to enable development of the game, “Cranky Uncle,” for iPhone and Android phones.
Cook has spent over a decade studying different ways to counter misinformation. He is now combining his research into inoculation, critical thinking, cartoon humor, and gamification, into a mobile game.
“Misinformation does great damage to society,” said Professor Cook, a member of Mason’s Institute for a Sustainable Earth. “An essential solution is making the public more resilient against fake news. But how? Gamification is a powerful approach that can potentially reach many millions of people.”
In the game, players are mentored by a cartoon Cranky Uncle who is dismissive of climate science. As they learn to recognize the flaws in Cranky Uncle’s arguments, they gain points. This is based on a behavioral technique called active inoculation.
“Before becoming a scientist, I drew cartoons for a living, “said Cook. “So, imagine my delighted surprise when after a decade of research, I discovered that cartoons were a powerful tool in countering misinformation.”
Cook has tested a prototype of the game in various college classes. “My students appreciated the combination of humor and real-world examples, while I appreciated how engaged they were in learning how to critically think,” said Professor Melanie Trecek-King at Massasoit Community College, Massachusetts. “Learning how not to be fooled is empowering.”
The crowdfunding page is at https://advancement.gmu.edu/crowdfunding-crankyuncle and more information is available at http://crankyuncle.com.
###
Websites: http://crankyuncle.com http://skepticalscience.com
Biography
Dr. John Cook is a research assistant professor at George Mason University, founder of the Skeptical Science website, and lead author of a crowd-funded study finding 97% scientific consensus on climate change. He has spent the last decade researching how to counter climate science denial. His PhD into cognitive science found that inoculation, for explaining the techniques of denial, is the key to making the public resilient against misinformation. His research has explored critical thinking and cartoon debunkings (dusting off his skills as a former cartoonist). He is now testing how mobile games can increase critical thinking in classrooms.
About George Mason University:
George Mason University is Virginia’s largest public research university. Located near Washington, D.C., Mason enrolls 38,000 students from 130 countries and all 50 states. Mason has grown rapidly over the last half-century and is recognized for its innovation and entrepreneurship, remarkable diversity and commitment to accessibility. Learn more at http://www.gmu.edu.
About the Center for Climate Change Communication
The Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University develops and applies social science insights to help society make informed decisions that will stabilize the earth’s life-sustaining climate, and prevent further harm from climate change. Learn more about our research and expertise at https://www.climatechangecommunication.org/
About the Institute for a Sustainable Earth
The Institute for a Sustainable Earth at George Mason University connects members of the Mason community with others across the Mason community-and with other communities, policy-makers, businesses and organizations-so that, together, we can more effectively address the world’s pressing sustainability and resilience challenges. Learn more at http://www.ise.gmu.edu
“Misinformation”?
He’s not teaching people to resist “misinformation”, he’s indoctrinating people with the warmist agenda. If he was truly concerned about combating misinformation, he’d be a climate skeptic.
This is why they dumb then down in the public schools so they can play games on their smart phone in College and pretend they are finally getting an education.
4 years, a smart(?)phone, and a cracker jack box diploma is all it takes to get a college degree. Sadly 60% of those graduates can’t find Mexico on a map but they are absolutely certain the reason it is hot there is because of climate change and John Cooks Angry Uncle App.
Assumes facts not in evidence. He may be in Venice, in which case he will never hit the groundd
He’s a stunt man, big pile of cardboard boxes…..
Scientist: “You’re gonna hit the ground in 6 seconds.”
Cranky Uncle: “Get back to me when you have more data.”
6 seconds later:
Scientist: “You’re gonna hit the ground in 6 seconds.”
Cranky Uncle: “That’s what you said last time.”
Scientist: “You were slowed down by natural variation. This time it’s real.”
Exactly.
35 years ago: “In 25 years your town will be beachfront property due to rising ocean levels!”
Today: “In 25 years your town will be beachfront property due to rising ocean levels!”
Still waiting.
Yes, memorizing rationalization and talking points, by rote, without actually bothering to think about them – he’s training a new batch of Ocasio-cortez clones.
And with proper clothing frostbitten extremities shouldn’t curtail the touch-screen’s utility too much during Winter blackouts.
you need a Center for Climate Change Communication…
…when the science lets you down
Exactly, let’s start one. Crowd source funding should be a breeze.
The Center should rate sources and aps based on proper Peer Review.
I don’t want to jump the snark but suspect Cook’s game will be rated propaganda / zero confidence – not for intelligent viewers of all ages.
The example shown is missing the correct answer: “Straw Man”.
Exactly, the irony of John Cook developing a game to arm users against ‘climate change fake news’, wouldn’t he be arming users against himself?
Cook obviously has mastered in the art of misinformation (as in deception)
yes MISinformation sure IS his specialty
They have a big concern to fear skeptical thoughts, even developing games, not beliebeble.
😀
Scientific arguments, that doesn’t exist so far, wouldt be better 😀
It appears that the James Mason Sustainability site and their Sustainability Scoop webpages do not have a comment section for readers to provide feedback or to provide data supporting or countering their information. I find that the lack of a public comment sections on any media site generally indicates they are fake news or have a hidden agenda.
I hope you can prove me wrong with data and links.
No comments allowed at Mason? This is jarring.
And it only cost the U.S. taxpayers X millions of dollars.
Oh, you have no idea.
“After examining the reports, and removing double counting, calculations show that from Fiscal Year 1993 to FY 2014 total U.S. expenditures on climate change amount to more than $166 billion in 2012 dollars.”
https://www.climatedollars.org/full-study/us-govt-funding-of-climate-change/
If his game actually does teach critical thinking skills, the unentended consiquince of that could be more skeptics. I don’t think that’s what he intends.
Exactly.
In 11 Years, 9 months, 29 days, when the world is arguably better than it is today (poverty lower, less people starving) and world sea level has only gone up a frightening 1 inch with CO2 @ur momisugly 500 PPM (Thanks China and India), there will be millions more “Climate Skeptics”.
This is exactly why I have a blog “Watching those who Watch the Deniers”.
About
I stumbled upon a sight “Watching the Deniers”. It reminded me of the Star Trek episode “Who watches the watchers?” I decided that perhaps someone should be watching the watchers of deniers. Thus, this blog.
https://watchingthewatchersofdeniers.wordpress.com/about/
I’ve never encountered your site. Looking forward to a read on this overcast day in Cambridge, MA.
Best,
John
John McClure December 6, 2019 at 6:12 am
About
I stumbled upon a sight “Watching the Deniers”. It reminded me of the Star Trek episode “Who watches the watchers?” I decided that perhaps someone should be watching the watchers of deniers:
Set the controls for the heart of the Sun.
https://www.google.com/search?q=set+the+controls+for+the+heart+of+the+sun&oq=set+the+con&aqs=chrome.
Dr. John Crook ?
Yes Cook was awarded a PhD is psychology for working with Lewandowsky.
Must suck to spend all that time and energy to get a PhD in Psychology and your career as a bad cartoonist is still your better asset.
…..And to be consistent with his history of sleight of hand in Climate Science, he is touted as a “Scientist from George Mason University.
One must read a lot deeper to discover his PhD is in “cognitive” science; i.e. a psychologist.
Clearly a disciple of Edwin Bernays who wrote a book on how to influence public opinion (e.g. buy war bonds) and titled it after the new term he invented “Propaganda”.
(Edwin was dismayed at what Goebbels did with his theories and in a subsequent book re-branded his research with another term he coined, Public Relations.)
Exactly. He is quoted as the first reference at the NASA climate consensus website, and people believe he is a climate scientist. AFAIK he’s never studied physics or chemistry so claiming to be a scientist is a bit…fake.
He studied how to Photoshop his head into old Nazi photos. He’s good at that. Everything else, not so much.
if he was honest the lady in the window would say “you’ll hit the ground in 3 to 250 seconds but we have no idea why you are falling” …
It’s a straw man fallacy. We assume that it’s intended that the cranky uncle is going to hit the ground hard. ie. gravity works. The uncertainty about when he hits the ground is irrelevant.
For global warming, the uncertainty matters big time. We’re being asked to destroy the free world’s economy based on very uncertain apocalyptic conjectures.
It’s a straw man fallacy because the cartoonist presents the skeptic argument as though uncertainty is irrelevant. That’s not what the skeptics are actually arguing (and that makes the cartoon’s argument a straw man). The skeptic argument is that the outcome is by no means certain. In fact, whatever warming happens will probably be beneficial. That’s less uncertain than the apocalypse.
Indeed. It’s not the accuracy which is in question, it’s the whole hypothesis.
You can’t be accurate by using the wrong equation.
There is a great deal of uncertainty about what metric is, let alone what the value is.
If the one falling has only three inches to tumble, the timing is irrelevant.
What’s amazing to me is the length to which Cook will go in his persistent misrepresentation of what others think, see and understand.
I don’t understand why he is called a scientist. Psychology is not a science. It is a collection of techniques, many dubious and others useful. Perhaps his former profession has been auto-corrected in error: lampoonist was intended.
He’s not a Psychologist either. he was awarded a degree of some kind because of his association with Lewandowski, or something.
There is insufficient information given in the cartoon example, as is usual for the CAGW-infected.
Is he in Earth’s gravity or some other planet? There are plans to occupy the moon/Mars.
Is he only under the influence of gravitational forces (e.g. merely stepped off of a roof) or were there other forces acting on him (e.g. he was thrown – perhaps by XR>)?
How long has he been falling?
What is the height of the building?
Why 12-15 seconds if ‘the science is settled’?
No doubt there are other questions that should be considered
Don’t forget, air resistance and terminal velocity.
Another way of looking at this example is “You will hit the ground in 12 to 15 seconds… but I am not going to try and save you”
It is a bit like that joke where a group are sightseeing in a helicopter over a major city when suddenly the fog rolls in. Lost, and with radio not being able to help them they carefully fly between the buildings. Suddenly a large building looms out of the fog, and through the window they see a group of people looking back at them.
“Where are we?” they write on a piece of paper.
“In a helicopter” comes the reply.
The original punch line was “Oh, Microsoft HQ! So the airport is to our left” because the answer was technically correct but utterly pointless in context, just like the help function in MS Word.
In the context of the cartoon being told you have 12 to 15 seconds is (possibly) correct, but the important point is you are falling from building. Unless the falling person has a self rescue device that takes 10 seconds to deploy (and hence the 12 to 15 warning is important) the guy is still falling without hope of rescue and being a snark in return is completely the correct answer.
Surprised this Doctor Cook doesn’t know this. For a clown fish he isn’t that funny.
Why didn’t the pilot look at the compass?? Or GPS, unless this is a really old joke.
Just an old helicopter.
And while GPS tells you where you are, sometimes it doesn’t tell you what else is there at the same time as you. Only Radar or looking out of the window does that.
A woman in a hot air balloon realizes she is lost. She lowers her altitude and spots a man fishing from a boat below. She shouts to him, “Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don’t know where I am.”
The man consults his portable GPS and replies, “You’re in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.
She rolls her eyes and says, “You must be a Republican!”
“I am,” replies the man. “How did you know?”
“Well,” answers the balloonist, “everything you tell me is technically correct, but I have no idea what to do with your information, and I’m still lost. Frankly, you’re not much help to me.”
The man smiles and responds, “You must be a Democrat.”
“I am, replies the balloonist. “How did you know?”
“Well,” says the man, “You don’t know where you are or where you’re going. You’ve risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and now you expect me to solve your problem. You’re in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but, somehow, now it’s my fault.”
To be analogous to the climate debate, the lady should be stating that he is going to hit the ground in -2 to +3 seconds. (Or if Dr Frank is right, -20 to +30 seconds.)
With these more applicable facts, and not knowing that he is already falling, how could one even state that he IS falling.
Now which fallacy is the right answer?
Yep, commieBob December 5, 2019 at 12:10 pm
It’s a straw man fallacy. We assume that it’s intended that the cranky uncle is going to hit the ground hard. ie. gravity works. The uncertainty about when he hits the ground is irrelevant.
https://www.google.com/search?q=4+universal+forces+in+nature&oq=4+universal+forces&aqs=chrome.
Gravity is the weakest force. The weak human, bound by weak nuclear forces, smashes on the ground.
Doesn’t matter to the Universe; even the solid ground, too bound by weak nuclear force, nevertheless stays nearly unimpressed:
Atoms in Molecules are bound by magnitudes greater forces – Atoms and Molecules “survive”.
About SKEPTICAL SCIENCE.COM
“The abuse and censorship does not pertain to simply any dissenting commentator there but to highly credentialed and respected climate scientists as well; Dr. Pielke Sr. has unsuccessfully attempted to engage in discussions there only to be childishly taunted and censored, while Dr. Michaels has been dishonestly quoted and smeared. The irony of the site’s oxymoronic name “Skeptical Science” is that the site is not skeptical of even the most extreme alarmist positions.
John Cook is now desperately trying to cover up his background that he was employed as a cartoonist for over a decade with no prior employment history in academia or climate science.
Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can reveal what his website originally said,
“I’m not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist” – John Cook, Skeptical Science”
It looks like he’s embracing his ignorance in science to attempt to make his cartoonist, not scientific, “credentials” sound good.
Self employed is what my brother tells everyone when he is unemployed.
Jay
The joke in Silicon Valley is that the alternate description of an unemployed person is that they are a ‘consultant.’
He’s nothing like any kind of climate scientist.
He’s a propagandist who has found a way to cash in on the CAGW gravy train. In that regard, he should be forbidden from calling himself a scientist because scientists are supposed to be interested in the truth.
My local bartender earned his PhD in Cognitive Science by working bars all his life….
If your local bartender listened to his patrons, he just might be far wiser than most psychologists. I can’t say it’s worth a PhD, but there ya go.
I did not complete my university degree but after many years of labour in the real world, have a PhD* anyway
* Post hole Digger
Piled Higher and Deeper.
From Wikipedia (apropos, I think)
“The cognitive revolution was an intellectual movement that began in the 1950s as an interdisciplinary study of the mind and its processes. It later became known collectively as cognitive science.[1] The relevant areas of interchange were between the fields of psychology, linguistics, computer science, anthropology, neuroscience, and philosophy.[2] and cartoons…They used approaches developed within the then-nascent fields of artificial intelligence, computer science, and neuroscience. ”
OK, OK I confess–I put in the “cartoon” part! But it fits.
There is no such thing as a “climate scientist”. They’re all dedicated to fudging past temperature records to match their dodgy computer models. No sort of scientist at all.
If there is a link to that quote please post it as it is pure gold. The number of people who claim Cook is a climate scientist because he is quoted at NASA is remarkable.
BTW, I was banned from Sks for stating interglacial periods are warmer than glacial periods.
Misinformation? The dear Dr doesn’t have a clue.
Before I became a scientist …
It took me a lifetime to be a scientist. And now I’m retired I sometimes wonder whether J really am. And mr Cook made the quantum leap in a few month? Really? Methinks he is deluding himself.
Science, in general, has a replication crisis. Psychology, surprisingly, isn’t as bad as some fields. Only half the published research findings are obviously wrong.
Because of an oversupply of PhDs and the resulting desperation to publish, the value of their work has become highly suspect.
They don’t make PhDs like they used to.
Yes, when I read through the Retraction Watch website, I’m amazed that disciplines you’d think were kinda immune to having stuff retracted such as math and accounting, etc. I mean, papers retracted for plagiarism and stuff like that, sure. But how can someone get something peer reviewed, then published in a “legitimate” science publication with obvious math and stat errors?
Ok, those of us who read through the Climategate emails know the reason (i.e., pal review, minimal statistical knowledge, etc.).
https://retractionwatch.com/2019/12/04/publisher-retracts-nearly-50-papers-at-once/#more-118538
“minimal statistical
knowledgeethics”Fixed!
He must be from the Dr. Goebbels school of thought. His main schtick appears to be the use of straw man “logic”.
I didn’t even know what a signtist was, now I are one….
New game builds resilience against misinformation; ‘inoculates’ users against fake news on climate change; gamifies critical thinking
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
WUWT, Id est qui!
‘Practise what you preach’ is another relevant adage.
Yeah…
“an expert on misinformation”
Kinda like how a drunk is an expert on how to get drunk?
Think I’ll still take the word of a weatherman and a “retired mining engineer”, among others with real science backgrounds, over a bad cartoonist with a media degree.
OK, I must admit I’m a little shocked. I have found myself in agreement with John Cook, not just once, not twice, but THREE TIMES!
1. “Misinformation does great damage to society,” said Professor Cook, a member of Mason’s Institute for a Sustainable Earth. “An essential solution is making the public more resilient against fake news.”
AGREED! It is essential that we make the public more resilient against the fake news of the non-existent “climate emergency.”
2. “So, imagine my delighted surprise when after a decade of research, I discovered that cartoons were a powerful tool in countering misinformation.”
AGREED! Just check out JOSH’s cartoons – excellent at lampooning the ridiculous “climate crisis” bullshit!
“Learning how not to be fooled is empowering.”
HOW TRUE! Learning not to be suckered into voting oneself into poverty to pursue a non-solution to a non-problem is indeed empowering!
Using an example of a falling object where known physical principles covering force of gravity, wind resistance, velocity and distance have trivial uncertainty as an analogy for climate change/global warming where major fundamental processes and and physical forces are not even remotely understood just shows how desperate they are to avoid talking about the real science. They try to divert people’s attention from vast uncertainty to something that most people would understand as fairly certain. If they really believed climate change/global warming was settled they might try to argue based on the objective data that settled it, but then they would find they have essentially empty pockets. This is science corruption, this is organized lies, this is nothing but propaganda.
Andy Pattullo – Excellent!
“Using an example of a falling object where known physical principles covering force of gravity … as an analogy for climate change/global warming …” –> excellent formulation of the fallacy.
This is why I harp on the fact that we are not actually measuring the ‘greenhouse gas’ property of CO2.
With the Theory of Gravity, we didn’t define how it works, but we measured how it behaves with such precision that we were able to derive a set of Laws that allowed us to determine the planet Neptune exists before it was ever seen.
With the CAGW Theory, we’re told exactly how it theoretically works, but we’ve been unable to measure its behavior in any meaningful way. This leaves us with no ability to derive any tools of reason (Laws, Axioms, Postulates, formulae, etc). CAGW is an unreasonable theory.
Love it.
Back to the roots, science is not about “explaining”, it is about taking measurements, trying to define some basic rules that can be used to predict future.
I don’t care what gravity “really is”.
I think it would be neat to find out what it really is, and then maybe control it on a small scale. Anti-grav vehicles would be SO cool.
Good points. In addition note that the formula for distance fallen is 1/2gt^2, or slightly more than 16 times the number of seconds. The woman in the window would have to be over 2300 feet above the ground if the falling man started falling from that elevation.
Perhaps not the best example for what they are trying to communicate?
I’d say that John Cook’s understanding of gravity is about equal to his understanding of climate science. i.e. completely zero.
And besides; they present a red herring themselves because the argument isn’t about gravity, is it. It’s about an increase in radiative feedback caused by the increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. They present one argument in place of the real argument, then pretend that one aspect of of gravity is equivalent to the whole of atmospheric science. It’s a false equivalence fallacy.
The 1/2gt^2 is true if there was no atmosphere 🙂 So the things are even more complicated 🙂
I was thinking is myself! Some scientist Mr. Cook is…
“16 times the number of seconds” squared
I looked into this blankly, until I understood 5m/s2 equals 16 ft/s2. Not 256 times seconds squared, but 16ft/s2 times t squared. I must change to cartooning.
How much will the eigentime differ? Can’t bother to check myself.
+50
How does it handle that hot spot in the atmosphere that was the main con played on youth in schools? And how does it handle global warming causes cold from the John Holdren case files? And how does it handle long run natural cycles like the AMO or multi-cycle sun output changes? Or more fundamentally does it only use straight lines and hockey stick upturns in place of polynomials?
Does he have a cartoon illustrating the fallacy of Straw Man arguments?
We all know and regret that a lot of people say stupid things they think challenge the man-made climate change hypothesis. Their foolish comments don’t diminish the valid challenges.
Basically this is the tokamak of climate science and that’s as far as they get with cartoon science.
What a waste of time creating and promoting anti science babble.
Everybody who watches or listens to the BBC need to defend themselves from ‘fake news’ on climate change.
John Cook has a BSc in physics from The University of Queensland. He became known through his very dodgy research into scientists and their attachment to climate alarmism, coming up with the wholly discredited 97% which is the go-to defense of the climate alarmist who has lost all the other arguments to us realists. I have not been able to find that he has a PhD. I don’t think he does but he is a scientific bottom-feeder who has managed to find a job with a regular income. He started the Skeptical Science website which is hopeless. This is his latest venture as cartoons are clearly easier than ‘real’ physics.
Cook has a Bachelor’s degree in Science from the University of Queensland, and a PhD in some sort of Psychology from the University of Western Australia. His supervisor was Lewandowsky, and he has published a couple of papers with him on the “supposed” psychology of climate ‘denial’.
“..A George Mason University scientist is developing a mobile game that will teach users to defend themselves from ‘fake news’ on climate change….”.
This guy is making a very ignorant and faulty assumption here that the climate science at issue here (or at least the “science” that he believes) is infallible and unquestionable. That isn’t so much science as it is a political or religious doctrine as far as I am concerned. The believers in such doctrines treat them as though they are infallible. But they never are, and that is why I have a personal philosophy of questioning someone whenever he or she is trying to sell me a doctrine. It is why I am politically independent.
Creating a cellphone video game to further indoctrinate the true believers only adds to the idea that the climate alarmist narrative is largely a cult. The cult certainly doesn’t want to lose any members if it can avoid it.
Some people in this world (academia) deserve to be in the unemployment lines more than anywhere else.
some local kids made a game called crossy road
they made millions I gather
stuffed if I can see why but they did.
so I would say thats cook big goal in this
because the climate faithful WILL download the app and schools etc will aprove it.
I had such high hopes when I read the headline, but those hopes were dashed to smithereens when I read the name John Cook, the John Cook associated with that propaganda site.
Regards,
Bob
So when he photo shopped himself,in uniform,what kind of “misinformation” was he sending?
Cooky Boy should hold up a mirror.
For he is the “misinformation” of which he speaks.
Does he believe his own BS?If so Cook is more evidence of the Cult of Calamitous Climate.
Of course scamming gullible people about the weather is as old as spoken language.
Heap big storm,Gods angry at you.
Reward me and I will deflect Gods Wrath.
And thus was born State Religion.