The Los Angeles Times created a minor firestorm in the science blogosphere this week when it reported that 700 members of the American Geophysical Union plan to aggressively take on climate skeptics, including members of Congress.
The AGU -- the world's largest body of Earth scientists -- rushed to issue a clarification the next day to explain it was simply relaunching a question and answer service that connects reporters with scientists.
But the L.A. Times article had already taken on a life of its own. Nearly 10,000 people shared it on Facebook and nearly 1,000 sent links on Twitter. An abridged version posted on The Huffington Post generated more than 5,000 comments.
The gist of this overwhelming response was: "Finally, the scientists are speaking out!" But everyone was reacting to news of an "aggressive push" that wasn't.
The truth is, most scientific societies are reluctant to go beyond issuing formal statements about science-related issues, even in the face of withering attacks on the scientific fields they represent. But there are plenty of scientists who do want to defend their findings and their profession, especially when they come under attack by polluter-funded politicians and partisan talking heads on radio and television.
Recent efforts by the AGU and other scientific societies to help scientists engage with the media and the public are welcome. But scientists have to do more -- a lot more.
My organization, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), has been engaged in the sometimes bruising intersection of science, the media and policymaking for decades. And we've stepped up our work on climate science communication this year, largely in response to a significant uptick in attacks on the field. While the evidence for climate change has steadily mounted over the last few years, the push back by many oil and coal interests and the think tanks and politicians they bankroll has become ever more shrill, polluting the debate with misinformation and outright lies. The news media, unfortunately, has sometimes been an enabler, providing a forum for polluting industries' multimillion-dollar disinformation campaign, which mirrors the tobacco industry's successful campaign to sow public confusion about the link between smoking and cancer.
Over the last several years, for example, UCS has defended scientist Ben Santer from baseless claims by the Wall Street Journal editorial page as well as hundreds of federal scientists whose work was suppressed and manipulated by the George W. Bush administration. We pushed back on groundless attacks on scientists after unidentified hackers stole emails from a British university last fall. And we rushed to shine the spotlight on misinformation when Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli launched an unwarranted investigation into Michael Mann's work at the University of Virginia.
Today we are expanding our work connecting scientists with journalists and policymakers. We're helping scientists speak out on radio shows and op-ed pages, and we host regular press conferences to promote new research. Our Science Network works with thousands of scientists across the country to promote science on a range of issues, including climate change. And our "Got Science?" campaign is aimed at holding the pundits, news organizations and think tanks that spread misinformation about climate science accountable.
We're also trying new ways to communicate science. Our "Curious for Life" ad campaign captured scientists as the curious kids they were -- chasing bugs on a baseball field, stomping around in the mud, or gazing up at the stars. It's not how scientists typically talk about their work, but it struck a chord with the general public.
UCS believes that it is critical for the future that the public better understand science, and for that to happen, more scientists are going to have to step out of their labs, away from the field, and pause from their calculations to engage with their communities. A deeper public understanding of science would make our country a better place, make our democracy stronger, and ensure that our governmental policies are more strongly grounded in reality.
There is also a responsibility of the public to ensure that the individual member of our population sufficiently understands the science and technology of our culture well enough to make responsible informed decisions about science and technology. Too often today there appears to be a broadening gulf between the public and scientists. We must, as members of a culture highly dependent upon science and technology, work diligently to increase scientific literacy among our population and simultaneously ensure that scientists are successfully communicating their specialized knowledge to an eager and scientifically literate public audience.
Toward Civilization Next
Problems Present Plus Future World.
Climate Change Loss of Biodiversity.
The Most Visionary.
Global Solution.
The United World.
The Uni-Ruled World.
Solution All In One.
Solution All Built In.
Knowledgeable New Born.
Simplicity Too Evident.
Complexity Un-Designed.
Sure Insure Yes We Can.
Change The World Even.
Found Aladdin The Magic Lamp.
Un-Served Anything No Camp.
Anything Else Treat With Patch.
Well With Longest In Millennium.
Slow But Certain Mother’s Death.
Happy Words War Fears World War.
Twisting Pure Science Realize Result.
The Right Time In Planetory Court.
The One and The Only One.
World Ways Rules All Our Creation.
“Uni-Rule” Bound Further Civilization.
Climate Biodiversity Follows Function Unit.
No Purpose Solution Part For That Of Unit.
Idea Inherently Belong Present Rule System.
Rearrange Reassemble With Purpose Specific.
The Best Coincidental Global Chances.
Econo-Politico Close World Leadership.
Less Competitive Developing Half World.
Heartily Drafted Surviving Poor’s Words.
Never Will Come Such Favorable Time.
Never Remain Critical Still Safe Climate.
Solution Simple Sure.
Natural Logical-Balance.
Efficient Management.
Earth Unit Management.
Rethink Worth With Till Broad Mindset.
Longer Then Parents Wish Live Planet.
Solution All In One.
Solution All Built In.
Knowledgeable New Born.
The United World.
The Uni-Ruled World.
Hari Laxman
I've been following the UCS efforts since early in the GW Bush administration. It must often seem a thankless task, what with the way people like Robert Moen here seem to keep missing the point — about SwiftHack (aka Climategate), about the minor IPCC errors, and most of all about the amount of evidence for AGW that has been gathered.
With any luck these torrents of disputation will begin to subside so the scientists can get back to refining their understanding of the climate system full time.
NOAA forecasters estimate a 50% chance of minor geomagnetic storms Nov. 15th - 17th. Solar ejections are expected to deliver glancing blows to Earth's magnetic field.
The sun has begun a new 11 year sunspot cycle. Emissions have twice this year missed Earth. Another 500 plus are expected.
NASA forecasts four "extreme" events that could collapse power grids. And an additional 100 "severe" impacts during the next decade.
They warn that the eastern half of the USA might lose electric power for weeks!
Modern civilization depends on power grids. Water supply, food, and much else.
See: www.aesopinstitute.org for a few articles and an outline of how we can turn this threat, which will continue for the next decade, into a practical program of decentralized power.
A program to accelerate development, on a 24/7 basis, can generate cost-competitive green energy based on breakthrough technologies.
That can trigger far more rapid economic recovery and millions of jobs.
Future cars and trucks can become power plants when parked, selling power generated by revolutionary energy conversion systems. These vehicles may very well pay for themselves as investments.
They can also cost-effectively undercut the need for new power plants.
Incentives could provide distributed generation close to the point of use.
The Union of Concerned Scientists might alert the public to the threat. And evaluate new science and technology with open minds.
There are many reasons to reduce CO2 and other Greenhouse gas emissions. The most important is global warming.
-- Robert Moen, http://www.energyplanUSA.com
"Before the U.S. establishes a comprehensive energy policy, however, the issue of global warming needs to be addressed. It is extremely complicated and the climate science that aims to understand global warming is still in its infancy with an unproven track record."
Unproven track record?
"Global warming has become such a politically charged issue ( you know who managed to do that, now, don't you?) that the line between facts, guesses and propaganda becomes less clear by the day. Frankly, I blame my own party, the Democrats. They've turned the science of global warming into a partisan issue, (MBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA surely you jest!!) so I'm not surprised that substantially more than half the country – by my reckoning – is against cap-and-trade. Moreover, Democrats promote clean, expensive energy, whereas the country needs clean, cheap energy."
And, since you promote nuclear energy among others, tell us why Wall Street refuse to invest in it without 100% backstop government guarantees? Talk about cheap!
Just one question: How much do they pay you to spew that drivel?
Here's an interesting piece by Judy Curry:
I’m having another “Alice down the rabbit hole” moment, in response to the Scientific American article, the explication of the article by its author Michael Lemonick, Scientific American’s survey on whether I am a dupe or a peacemaker, and the numerous discussions in blogosphere.
The title of the article itself is rather astonishing. Use of the word “heretic” by Lemonick implies general acceptance by the “insiders” of the IPCC as dogma. If the IPCC is dogma, then count me in as a heretic. The story should not be about me, but about how and why the IPCC became dogma.
http://judithcurry.com/2010/10/25/heresy-and-the-creation-of-monsters/