Tactics to Turn Facts into Debates

 

 

Why is it when the majority of the science community are in consensus that climate change is happening and humans are to blame, half of the US population says it is all a hoax? In my last journal I talked about science illiteracy between the media and the science community. While, I still believe this is a major issue that should be addressed on both ends, it still leaves the question of how so much of this anti-climate change rhetoric came into the media?

Image result for snowball in congress

Oil corporations are using the same tactics the tobacco industry used to communicate the idea that: climate change (facts which may cause a drop in profit for their company) is not happening or caused by humans to create a debate on hard facts. Climate change is difficult to understand from a lay person’s perspective which makes it very easy to manipulate and communicate fallacies to the public. Oil companies hire respected scientists to support climate change skepticism, but these scientists are not trained in climate science and their fields of study are unrelated. A lot of the climate change skeptic scientists are the same scientists who said there was no evidence smoking affected your health and that we couldn’t prove acid rain was caused by Sox and NOx emissions from industry.

Image result for NIPCC report

Like tobacco industries, oil industries will create organizations that sound environmentally friendly, like the “environmental Policy Alliance,” to pay professionals to add skepticism to the public while sounding more reputable. Another example of this is the NIPCC, an organizations created to mimic the IPCC reports, but just give the exact opposite facts. The communications of lies all begins with some reputable voices and manipulating facts into uncertainties, then the debate begins and the media is even more confused because there are two opposing “facts” being presented to them.

 

-Katie McNulty

 

really good paper on concensus of climate change: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.lcv.org/media/blog/climate-deniers-taking-a-page.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/cif-green/2010/feb/19/climate-change-sceptics-science

Heartland Institute and its NIPCC report fail the credibility test

the major climate change skeptics and who funds them : http://www.lcv.org/media/blog/climate-deniers-taking-a-page.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Tactics to Turn Facts into Debates

  1. It’s absolutely a conspiracy that major oil companies are putting out disinformation out about climate change following almost the format that big tobacco and sugar companies have been using for years. What is even more scary than a large percentage of the general population believing that climate change is false is that these oil companies are paying off politicians to side with their propagated science to allow them to keep up with their disgusting practices of how oil is taken.

    Grant Moss

    Like

  2. Scientists have proven that climate change is happening and is caused by humans, and as it is a natural process, humans have exacerbated climate change at a rate never seen before in the history of our planet. I agree that this is exactly like the tobacco companies with cigarettes, but I think the climate change battle will be a lot harder because our planet’s climate is a very complex process to understand. Hopefully, one day we will be able to move away from using fossil fuels and use more sustainable energy.

    Jacob Fischer

    Like

  3. This kind of thing is rampant in our society. The information age has ushered in an age where people want to have immediate answers which has led to gross oversimplifications of topics leading to misinformation and unintelligible arguments in those debates. Bringing in a snowball to ‘debunk’ global warming suggests he doesn’t know anything about the fundamental issue being debated. That suggests a level of understanding surrounding this issue that you would achieve by only reading the name ‘Global Warming’ and even then not really understanding the warming, just warm. It’s unbelievable to me that people let this be an acceptable level of information on any platform at any level.

    Dylan Nourse

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s