John Cook - Climate Claim Prevalence. Source Monash University.

John Cook: “Machine learning holds a key to combating [climate] misinformation”

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

After training a computer to look for online climate “misinformation”, John Cook was surprised that people don’t trust the proposed solutions.

Climate change: How machine learning holds a key to combating misinformation

John Cook
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Monash Climate Change Communication Research Hub

“A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on.”

This quote appears in many forms. In some variants, the quote involves footwear. In other cases, the truth is struggling to get its pants on.

Regardless of the details, the sentiment encapsulates a key challenge of misinformation. By the time the meticulous task of fact-checking is complete and the correction has been disseminated, the misinformation has already spread widely and achieved all sorts of mischief.

Consequently, misinformation researchers speak wistfully of the “holy grail of fact-checking” – automatically detecting and debunking misinformation in one fell swoop. Machine learning offers the potential of both speed and scale – the ability to identify misinformation the instant it appears online, and the technical capacity to distribute solutions at the scale required to match the size of the problem.

But the holy grail quest faces a seemingly insurmountable hurdle. Misinformation evolves and sprouts new forms. How can you detect a myth before you even know what it is or what form it will take?

Once we had trained our machine to detect and categorise different misinformation claims, we fed our model 20 years’ worth of climate misinformation – more than 250,000 articles from 20 prominent conservative think-tank websites and 33 blogs. It’s the largest content analysis to date on climate misinformation, making it possible to construct a two-decade history of climate misinformation.

The results weren’t what I expected at all.

The erosion of public trust in climate scientists

During the past 15 years, I’ve been debunking scientific climate misinformation – the type of myths that fell under the categories “it’s not happening”, “it’s not us”, or “it’s not bad”.

It turns out these were the least common forms of climate misinformation. Instead, the largest category of climate misinformation was attacks on scientists and on climate science itself.

Climate misinformation isn’t about providing its own alternative explanation of what’s happening to our climate. Instead, it’s focused on casting doubt on the integrity of climate science, and eroding public trust in climate scientists.

But that’s not where misinformation is focused – the focus is on attacking scientists and science itself. There’s a dearth of research into understanding and countering this type of misinformation, let alone public engagement and education campaigns to counter their damage.

Read more: https://lens.monash.edu/@politics-society/2021/12/08/1384230/climate-change-how-machine-learning-holds-a-key-to-combating-misinformation
Herr John Cook Self Portrait

John Cook, we don’t have to provide an alternative explanation. It is enough for us to show that the alarmist model of global climate change is wrong.

Cook has a fascinating track record when it comes to climate communication, he has produced some interesting visual communication pieces in his time (see right and below).

But the one question he is not asking is, is there a legitimate reason for people to be skeptical?

How many predictions of imminent catastrophe have failed? How many “cheaper than coal” renewable energy schemes have instead driven up electricity bills? Why do places like California and Europe have such expensive energy, if renewables are the cheapest option? Why do greens expect people to go on believing them, when so much of what they say is just plain wrong?

Another John Cook Climate Communication. Originally posted on Cook’s Skeptical Science website.

Climate communication can only take a movement so far.

In the end, renewable energy advocates have to deliver value. If they can’t deliver, all the AI “misinformation” bots in the world won’t save their precious green revolution, from the gathering spontaneous uprising of ordinary people who are fed up with politicians frittering away their hard earned tax dollars on useless green boondoggles which inflict painful costs on ordinary people.

4.9 33 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

126 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Eda Rose-Lawson
December 9, 2021 9:12 am

“Climate misinformation isn’t about providing its own alternative explanation of what’s happening to our climate. Instead, it’s focused on casting doubt on the integrity of climate science, and eroding public trust in climate scientists.”

Has this man ever noticed that sceptic viewpoints have been banned from the BBC and other news outlets, at least as far as the British media is concerned, so how does he think we are eroding public trust?

Doug D
December 9, 2021 9:23 am

Well , Nazi, one reason we don’t trust anything you say is just you and your past record . Another reason is because intelligent people know that models are not evidence . And why would anyone bother putting together a new separate explanation for climate change , when your hypothesis attempting to overthrow the well established accepted theory of climate cycles . We already know the likely causes of climate change and have known it decades before the co2 hoax your involved in.
So go put your Nazi suit and attitude in the closet and quit embarrassing the scientific community

Raven
December 9, 2021 9:31 am

It turns out these were the least common forms of climate misinformation.

This also explains why practically no one visits Skeptical Science these days.

Damon
December 9, 2021 12:18 pm

If Skeptical Science believes his nonsense, why don’t they pay his salary?

David Wojick
December 9, 2021 12:55 pm

The open access Nature article reporting this research is fascinating:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-01714-4

Turns out us skeptics, our blogs and websites, are an ongoing research topic among the academic alarmists. The article’s references to other equally nutty studies is extensive. Worth a laugh all by itself.

Aaron
December 9, 2021 1:44 pm

I wonder what he used as his “truth” reference when he was programming his “machine”.

December 9, 2021 1:48 pm

we fed our model 20 years’ worth of climate misinformation

There’s a good start to get the result you want.

Scott
December 9, 2021 3:12 pm

Isn’t it telling how they’ve completely given up trying to win the scientific argument in favor of consensus and shutting down debate?

Alan M
December 9, 2021 4:33 pm

Sorry if this has been mentioned elsewhere (didn’t see it) but even funnier than the actual Cook article is that Oz ABC Fact check has used it, about half way down

Jeff Alberts
December 9, 2021 7:18 pm

Misinformation is mistaken information. What Cook is talking about is DISinformation, which is deliberate, like anything coming from the Obama/Biden White House.

MARTIN BRUMBY
December 9, 2021 9:15 pm

Well, John Cook is one of a small band that I would trust even less than Boris.

And that’s saying something.

What’s with Monash University?

No content with employing a blatantly dishonest dimwit like Cook, they produced a paper the other week claiming that masks reduce Covid transmission.

The claimed statistical significance of their “research” was pretty much the same as their claimed statistical significance for distancing. But they suggested that masks worked and distancing didn’t.

Which sounds “unusual” to me.

Only other mask benefit “study” I’ve seen was from Bangladesh. That was also obviously contrived.

Greg
December 10, 2021 4:07 am

Odd to find that as 100s of billions are poured into “energy transition” and our entire way of life is threatened by this propaganda that “solutions are not working” should evolve.
Catastrophic claims get more shrill, it’s worse than we thought, it’s a climate “crisis” here and now, while we have cut CO2 emissions.
Obviously it is working , right ?

Jon R
December 10, 2021 10:50 am

Apparently large computers are all communist and can’t be questioned because they are TheScience .

Kevin Stall
December 11, 2021 7:07 pm

Who says we trust the programmers