New Stanford Study Shows Scientific Expertise Lacking Among ‘Doubters’ of Climate Change

Science Daily has reported that in a quantitative analysis, the first of its kind regarding climate change, a group of Stanford University researchers found that the relatively small group of scientists who remain unconvinced that human beings have played a role in the rate of global climate change, have considerably less expertise and prominence than their anthropogenic (human-caused) scientific research counterparts.

The team analyzed the number of research papers published by more than 900 climate researchers and the number of times their work was cited by other scientists.  Expertise was evaluated by the number of papers on climate research written by each individual, with a minimum of 20 required to be included in the analysis.  Prominence was assessed by taking the four most frequently cited papers published in any field by each scientist — not just climate science publications — and tallying the number of times those papers were cited by other researchers.

“These are standard academic metrics used when universities are making hiring or tenure decisions,” said William Anderegg, lead author of the paper published in the online Early Edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences this week.

The results:

• Climate researchers who are convinced of human-caused climate change had on average about twice as many publications as the unconvinced
• Papers by climate researchers convinced of human effects were cited approximately 64 percent more often than papers by the unconvinced.
• When you look at the leading scientists who have made any sort of statement about anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change, you find 97 percent of those top 100 surveyed scientists explicitly agreeing with or endorsing the IPCC’s (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) assessment.

Media outlets (particularly in the United States) have eliminated “science” reporters and have gone to a business model of general reporting. This results in a lack of  understanding regarding scientific rigor and process on the part of reporters and journalism schools and the following of the mantra of getting someone to comment from the “other” side of a particular story.  The problem with this approach is that you are treating science and scientific research as if it is pure opinion like politics. 

“We really wanted to bring the expertise dimension into this whole discussion,” Anderegg said. “We hope to put to rest the notion that keeps being repeated in the media and by some members of the public that ‘the scientists disagree’ about whether human activity is contributing to climate change.”

“I never object to quoting opinions that are ‘way out.’ I think there is nothing wrong with that,” said Stephen Schneider, professor of biology and a coauthor of the paper in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “But if the media doesn’t report that something is a ‘way out’ opinion relative to the mainstream, then how is the average person going to know the relative credibility of what is being said?”

Source: Stanford University (2010, June 27). Scientific expertise lacking among ‘doubters’ of climate change, says new analysis. ScienceDaily

Short URL: http://www.oceanpowermagazine.net/?p=1693

Posted by admin on Jun 29 2010. Filed under Latest Ocean News, Ocean Environment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.