Thank you for pointing out these inaccuracies and exaggerations. It is indeed important to know what **exactly** we are talking about. Noah Smith likes to go overboard and one gets lost easily in his unsystematic arguing.
He often cites Hannah Ritchie. He should also look at her writing: sober, factual, systematic and unemotional. That’s how you make an impact.
Thank you for the comment! I completely agree with the need for rational reporting and writing on an issue as complex as climate change. If you are interested, starting tonight I’ll publish a series of posts in which I identify other false claims of “climate denial.” My first post is about Bloomberg TV implying Liberty Energy’s CEO Chris Wright is a “climate denier.”
I just took the survey after you had posted it on Notes, I came here to tell you exactly what you had written in the piece above.
Dismissing anyone who isn’t panicked about climate change as a ‘climate denier’ - a term that in itself is too definitionally broad - is extremely unproductive at best.
It’s a shame that institutions like Yale are comfortable making wild extrapolations from four vague questions.
Thank you very much for taking the survey and reporting about it, Forrest. The discrepancy between the actual questions and how the results are presented by Yale and Noah Smith is just so large that I initially thought I was the one who was wrong. No way they would be so mistaken in their interpretation! I feel relieved that someone else sees the same issue. Cheers!
It's always nice to know you're not alone in your reactions. If you have the time, I'd love it if you checked out my newsletter, Tian. There might be some more stuff we agree on - or other places that have room for discourse. I'm following you on Notes, now, and I look forward to your next post!
The 2 climate communication organizations responsible for the survey have published a paper. They define the “doubtful” and “dismissive” as follows:
The Doubtful do not think global warming is happening or believe it is just a natural cycle and not a serious risk. Finally, the Dismissive believe global warming is not happening, human-caused, or a threat, and most endorse conspiracy theories (e.g., “global warming is a hoax”).
Again, it is incredible they are making such claims and that the paper passed peer review.
Thank you Michael. I will have a longer post explaining the concept soon and the motivation for it. And congratulations on reaching the milestones you had set for yourself ahead of time!
Thank you for pointing out these inaccuracies and exaggerations. It is indeed important to know what **exactly** we are talking about. Noah Smith likes to go overboard and one gets lost easily in his unsystematic arguing.
He often cites Hannah Ritchie. He should also look at her writing: sober, factual, systematic and unemotional. That’s how you make an impact.
Thank you for the comment! I completely agree with the need for rational reporting and writing on an issue as complex as climate change. If you are interested, starting tonight I’ll publish a series of posts in which I identify other false claims of “climate denial.” My first post is about Bloomberg TV implying Liberty Energy’s CEO Chris Wright is a “climate denier.”
I just took the survey after you had posted it on Notes, I came here to tell you exactly what you had written in the piece above.
Dismissing anyone who isn’t panicked about climate change as a ‘climate denier’ - a term that in itself is too definitionally broad - is extremely unproductive at best.
It’s a shame that institutions like Yale are comfortable making wild extrapolations from four vague questions.
Thank you very much for taking the survey and reporting about it, Forrest. The discrepancy between the actual questions and how the results are presented by Yale and Noah Smith is just so large that I initially thought I was the one who was wrong. No way they would be so mistaken in their interpretation! I feel relieved that someone else sees the same issue. Cheers!
It's always nice to know you're not alone in your reactions. If you have the time, I'd love it if you checked out my newsletter, Tian. There might be some more stuff we agree on - or other places that have room for discourse. I'm following you on Notes, now, and I look forward to your next post!
Yes I will check it out, thank you for the suggestion.
The 2 climate communication organizations responsible for the survey have published a paper. They define the “doubtful” and “dismissive” as follows:
The Doubtful do not think global warming is happening or believe it is just a natural cycle and not a serious risk. Finally, the Dismissive believe global warming is not happening, human-caused, or a threat, and most endorse conspiracy theories (e.g., “global warming is a hoax”).
Again, it is incredible they are making such claims and that the paper passed peer review.
Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352154621000929
I like the concept of your newsletter.
Thank you Michael. I will have a longer post explaining the concept soon and the motivation for it. And congratulations on reaching the milestones you had set for yourself ahead of time!