Dr. Tim Ball
Previous Conversation On Dr. Ball's Adages
Items mentioned in / related to the conversation
"The "97% consensus" article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country that the energy minister should cite it. It offers a similar depiction of the world into categories of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to that adopted in Anderegg et al.’s 2010 equally poor study in PNAS: dividing publishing climate scientists into ‘believers’ and ‘non-believers’. It seems to me that these people are still living (or wishing to live) in the pre-2009 world of climate change discourse. Haven’t they noticed that public understanding of the climate issue has moved on?" (emphasis added)(The orginal comment can be viewed here: http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/makingsciencepublic/2013/07/23/whats-behind-the-battle-of-received-wisdoms/)
Slide show image: "ambiguity" by Lori Greig on Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0); aspect ratio altered, vignette applied, sharpened. As the resultant might be considered a "new work" it is here published, in accordance with the licence requirements, under the same licence (CC BY-SA 2.0).