MANY mainstream media science, economic and environmental journalists are not sufficiently trained to be aware of the limitations of models when they present climate-modelled output computated projections not only as data but also advocate this output as supposed proof of the threat posed by anthropogenic global warming, particularly with regard to runaway or catastrophic climate change. This disjunct between the scientific and media presentation when contained within the paradigm of advocacy represents a threat to the integrity and falsifiability of science.
Science seeks the truth in knowledge; (some) media advocacy seeks to propagandise this knowledge. The impact is reinforced if a climate scientist/modeller is directly quoted as an expert, further blurring the line between science and advocacy. This has societal repercussions as the science of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and the perceived impact of runaway or catastrophic climate change is so model-dependent that the citizenry is not always able to differentiate between the science and advocacy – the implications of which, as regards policy development in term of climate change mitigation, are likely to have a profound effect on society. [Read more…] about Models Blur Science and Advocacy: A Note from Ian Read
THE New York Times, like most of the mainstream media, is not known for its balanced reporting on climate change. I tend to associate the newspaper with sensational headlines suggesting a full blown climate crisis.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.