Matthew Nisbet https://mattnisbet.substack.com/
@mcnisbet
Followers
2,114
Following
1,974
Media
466
Statuses
1,984
Professor @NortheasternU . Past EIC #EnvComm , Columnist @ISSUES , @ConversationU , @SkeptInquirer ; Fellow @Shorenstein @RWJF @Dartmouth @Exploratorium @Googleorg
Boston MA
Joined November 2020
Don't wanna be here?
Send us removal request.
Explore trending content on Musk Viewer
FEMA
• 764979 Tweets
ORM BKK INTER CATWALK
• 274097 Tweets
裏金議員
• 129455 Tweets
True Way Of Worship
• 109686 Tweets
SB19 LIVE
• 73834 Tweets
#ドラゴンボール超スーパーヒーロー
• 46089 Tweets
#AlwaysToYouHannie
• 30427 Tweets
タリーズ
• 24923 Tweets
Mauritius
• 22584 Tweets
Chagos Islands
• 22362 Tweets
ピッコロさん
• 20961 Tweets
$RDOG
• 19962 Tweets
ダンダダン
• 19440 Tweets
スタートライン
• 18121 Tweets
Luis Carlos Vélez
• 16033 Tweets
コータロー
• 15318 Tweets
チカッパ
• 12305 Tweets
首相方針
• 10850 Tweets
セキュリティコード
• 10605 Tweets
比例重複
• 10454 Tweets
Pinned Tweet
Glad to see
@PNAS
editors +
@leahstokes
et al. update their 2023
#windpower
study with
#COI
statement. More is needed on Mann assigned as editor, flaws in data analysis + conclusions and Stokes dual role as academic + senior staffer at dark money NGO etc
Here is the full thread on
@leahstokes
#PNAS
study about
#wind
power opposition on flaws/biases in assumptions, statistical analysis + reporting, and undisclosed conflict of interest concerns [It's reverse order - original thread is cut off]
3
6
15
0
0
2
Passion is not misconduct — but calling other leading academic climate researchers "deniers" violates every standard we should expect of a scientist/academic.
Nor should we expect a scientist/academic to repeatedly promote to 200k+ Twitter followers a belief in "pure evil" to
27
79
257
1) Questions that reporters should ask abt
@patagonia
news: Chouinard has created a 401C4 entity which enables him + small circle of family/advisors to spend $100M+/year in unrestricted funds on elections, lobbying + campaigns -- in perpetuity.
@Revkin
@lesliehook
@timmcdonnell
10
52
236
After noticing climate scientist Michael Mann's repeated use of the term "pure evil" to refer to the GOP, its leaders, and supporters via Tweets to his more than 200K followers — I was curious about research on what be related to a belief in "pure evil."
Turns out there is a
14
23
108
Instead of engaging with the substantive, detailed concerns I raise about her
#PNAS
study - Leah Stokes has instead decided to block me. She is happy to use X as a platform for promotion + advocacy but not critical, evidence-based discussion of her research.
1)
@leahstokes
+
@J_Lovering
-- In the interest of open science + extended peer review, I am using this thread as a forum to address several concerns I have about your
@PNASNews
study + to pose several questions FYI
@Revkin
@Fisher_DanaR
14
20
88
20
11
94
1)
@leahstokes
+
@J_Lovering
-- In the interest of open science + extended peer review, I am using this thread as a forum to address several concerns I have about your
@PNASNews
study + to pose several questions FYI
@Revkin
@Fisher_DanaR
14
20
88
Dear
@stuartjdneil
: Your Tweet in the wake of the Mann verdict is troubling — especially for someone concerned about restoring trust in the scientific community by way of your
#misinfo
messaging work with
@STWorg
+
@Sander_vdLinden
et al.
Your Tweet does damage to that very
18
18
83
1) Apparently the climate scientist Michael Mann believes that SourceWatch -- a decades outdated, inaccurate web page maintained by the rag tag Center for Media & Democracy -- is a credible source -- > It wouldn't stand muster as a source in an undergraduate student paper.
UPDATE
12. In response to my essay,
@michaelemann
continues to promote disinformation about
@thebti
, linking to an
@sourcewatch
page that is wildly inaccurate and hasn't been updated in almost a decade. And yet, enviro journos continue the fawning, uncritical coverage.
6
7
37
6
28
77
1)
@johnfocook
there are serious problems w/ this paper w/ many of the coding classifications failing on the most obvious tests of validity. You code as "denialist" topics of legitimate expert debate
@brossardd
@scheufele
@maxboykoff
@mss7676
@Revkin
4
19
59
Examples of obvious methodological flaws by advocacy-driven climate social scientists are endemic across journals. As part of growing overall academic paper mill, editors + reviewers are swamped + sometimes share bias of authors meaning obvious flaws are not caught.
That's something you learn in any Intro to Statistical Inference course (or at least I did). So it was shocking (to me and my coauthors) to see the Sovacool et al. paper published in high profile
@NatureEnergyJnl
w/an explosive claim that nuclear isnt helpful for CO2 reductions.
3
9
115
1
23
57
1) Note to
@washingtonpost
'
@travismandrews
, journos + data scientists:
@twitter
should not be used as stand in for American public opinion, mood, sentiment, behavior etc. This is bad social science + bad journalism. FYI
@scheufele
@mbrossard
#scicomm
4
24
56
Dear Stuart: In this thread, I presented you with the criteria for demonstrating defamation in the U.S. and asked for specific examples of statements by
@Ayjchan
or
@mattwridley
that fit that criteria.
Instead, you have only replied with reasons why you believe they lack the
@stuartjdneil
Dear Stuart: I have followed most closely the investigative work, articles/books, and interviews/commentary of
@Ayjchan
+
@mattwridley
on COVID origins which have played a vital role in contributing to broader discussion and analysis.
Since you included them in the list of
2
5
30
3
12
52
In this thread, I call attn to a stunning
@sciam
column by
@HarvardHistSci
Naomi Oreskes in which she calls for crisis-level planning by governments to prevent a "destructive," "swelling," "surge" of new births from destroying the earth [which means African people -- see Pew
1) In a 3/23
@scicam
column,
@HarvardHistSci
's Naomi Oreskes declared that the world faced a looming crisis of too many people — something not to be celebrated but to be feared. To stop the "destructive surge" and "encroachment of a swelling human population" — we needed a
1
1
7
1
16
43
Once Congress reconvenes, the President must be impeached and immediately removed from office.
0
12
40
In latest from "Scientists Warning" series — Ehrlich et al call for national leaders to implement 0-to 1-child norm as part of global
#GND
"deliberately + humanely sloping the population trajectory downward." Hmm..what could go wrong?
@yadugar_
@SFuntowicz
@Revkin
@RogerPielkeJr
20
10
36
1) At my
#WealthofIdeas
newsletter, I am tracing the history of sci, tech + enviro controversies. I kick off w/ the most persistent of myths -- still voiced by
@BillNye
et al -- despite 20+ yrs of contradictory findings
#scicomm
#STS
#SciPublic
#PCST
1
11
36
Excellent paper from
@RogerPielkeJr
on catastrophe blind spots. When COVID-19 shutdown the world, I devoted months to deep reading/reflection -- given my own + most experts disportionate attn to climate over pandemics FYI
@Revkin
@brossard
@scheufele
Our blind spots discussed here
Catastrophes of the 21st Century
1
3
9
2
16
35
@TomSteyer
4) It's easy to be blinded by Chouinard's "good fight" on climate action and land protection, but who elected him and a few other close advisors as a $100m/year political powerbroker on these issues?
@RogerPielkeJr
2
0
35
5) And now Chouinard + friends will not only be interfering in U.S. elections, but also land use decisions across the Global South, all in the name of what he defines as the "good fight."
0
1
34
Not only does Michael Mann quote me out of context — he seems to be unfamiliar w/ the thousands of studies/articles on climate change as a wicked problem:
Here is the full quote from the concluding paragraph to my 2,500-word column on "The Trouble with
7
7
32
1) I have my first post up at my
@SubstackInc
newsletter
#WealthofIdeas
. In essays & podcast conversations, I will be exploring the battle of ideas over today's problems + the need for moderation, pragmatism, & institutional thinking in an age of extremes
5
9
33
1) How have the impossible-to-miss flaws in this influential 2021 Lancet Planet Earth study claiming widespread climate anxiety among global youth been completely ignored? It's a survey study about worry + anxiety at the apex of the COVID-19 pandemic that never asks the "compared
2
14
30
@stuartjdneil
Dear Stuart: I have followed most closely the investigative work, articles/books, and interviews/commentary of
@Ayjchan
+
@mattwridley
on COVID origins which have played a vital role in contributing to broader discussion and analysis.
Since you included them in the list of
2
5
30
2) "Holdfast Collective" is in the same category as Club for Growth + Americans for Prosperity -- but guaranteed $100M in spending/year. That's 2X & 4X what these groups are spending in 2022 elections to date
@michaelkavate
@Ben_Geman
0
1
29
Fascinating, well-done
#scicomm
study on "collateral damage" from quick draw debunking efforts targeting
#vaccine
#misinformation
by
@nicky_krause
,
@elhowell23
,
@scheufele
&
@UW_LSC
colleagues FYI
@Sander_vdLinden
@johnfocook
@BrendanNyhan
thoughts?
1
2
29
Perceptions of a hostile, biased press drive climate science to "get ahead of the story" + to skirt important questions of uncertainty, as a silent middle of scientists feels pressure not to speak up. See excellent study on this....
This is such an odd and troubling motivation for doing scientific research - to win the daily news cycle over your political opponents
37
77
209
3
14
27
1) You would think that at a time when our very democracy is at risk -- and Americans are literally killing each other -- that climate activists like
@MichaelEMann
would rethink their Manichean, black+white obsession with war metaphors.
#scicomm
#envcomm
3
12
25
1) Shame on
@ScienceMagazine
: Instead of scholar who could scrutinize Mann's claims that
@billgates
,
@KenCaldeira
,
@DKeithClimate
,
@TheBTI
et al are "inactivists" + "false solutionists" for emphasizing nuclear, adaption + CCC, they chose
@UCSUSA
advocate
4
10
26
For those following this thread: See the dialogue begun with
@stuartjdneil
on his reasoning about who might be "next up" for a Mann-style defamation suit — and my reply on the a) standards for demonstrating defamation, b) why defamation suits are likely to backfire and c) what
@stuartjdneil
Dear Stuart: I have followed most closely the investigative work, articles/books, and interviews/commentary of
@Ayjchan
+
@mattwridley
on COVID origins which have played a vital role in contributing to broader discussion and analysis.
Since you included them in the list of
2
5
30
1
4
25
1) The
@UABBarcelona
/
@ESCP_bs
of this
@naturesustainab
Brief Communication claim that there is "widespread skepticism" among "climate policy researchers" in high-income countries about "green"/ sustainable growth — yet their sample does not allow them to make this claim.
3
8
25
2) These are the type of cherry picked, sloppy mischaracterizations and sourcing patterns that I flagged as a peer reviewer for his last book w/
@ColumbiaUP
. The book was published w/out any corrections. Mann thanked "Matthew Nesbitt (sic)" as a reviewer.
1
6
25
1) After writing this piece about
@TheGuardian
,
@CoverClimateNow
, CJR campaign, people have asked which sources I trust and rely on. Here is a list [not ranked in order].
#scicomm
#envcomm
3
4
23
Fascinating 200 page
@YaleCELP
analysis supporting longstanding
@TheBTI
/
#ecomodernist
argument that best way to improve environment is to boost per capita GDP by way of clean, abundant energy + best way to destroy enviro is keep people poor
2
10
23
1) Glad to see
@JesseJenkins
include assumptions abt modeling + worth debating: a) "low friction" build out given scale. Alternative assumption is "medium-high friction" based on history of T-line/pipeline/wind battles.
@RogerPielkeJr
@Revkin
@JaneAFlegal
1
7
22
1) Like in this story
@robinsonmeyer
- journos + others have been too quick to fit
@leahstokes
study to a preferred NIMBYism narrative. YET the study does not present any evidence of how easy it is to block/delay a wind farm -- just that opposition is increasing...[MORE]
Here is the full thread on
@leahstokes
#PNAS
study about
#wind
power opposition on flaws/biases in assumptions, statistical analysis + reporting, and undisclosed conflict of interest concerns [It's reverse order - original thread is cut off]
3
6
15
2
6
22
From the article: "...these policies amounted to affirmative action for the children of the 1 percent, whose parents earn more than $611,000 a year." .
1
9
21
Bravo to
@nytimes
for taking the lead on
#climateadaptation
reporting by
@cflav
(generally) +
@bradplumer
,
@henryfountain
on this article. Much more adaptation journalism needed across outlets as we pass 1.5C in nxt few years + are certain to pass 2C.
2
5
21
In covering the
@Northeastern
protests, the student staff of
@HuntNewsNU
led by EIC
@elicurwin
are delivering outstanding reporting on breaking developments, focusing on the particulars and in a dialectical way the many perspectives involved.
2
3
21
In my latest
@SubstackInc
essay, I take a critical look at the addiction design strategies behind the boom in mobile mindfulness apps -- drawing on a recent study by
@STS_Rebecca
FYI
@ronpurser
@jmreagle
@CaulfieldTim
#scicomm
#sts
#mindfulness
0
7
21
8) But 30 years of research on wind power opposition explicitly contradicts + warns against these over-generalizations + biased judgments including a major review article you cite that parallels period of your analysis. Yet you ignore the contradictions.
3
3
20
I agree with
@RogerPielkeJr
there is the possibility of a classic series of studies -- perhaps a 3-4 paper dissertation at
@CUBoulderENVS
— applying insights from 50 years of interdisciplinary research specific to the:
a) The politics of technocratic expertise, the
Real Climate authors 2005 (LEFT): "we are not taking a political stand"
Real Climate authors 2023 (RIGHT): "The Republican Party must be destroyed"
4
43
155
5
10
18
1) Scholars have been pointing out for 20yrs why it's too simple a narrative for wind advocates + journalists to blame "NIMBYism" + misinformation for local opposition to renewables FYI
@revkin
@billmckibben
@maxboykoff
@pwrhungry
@dgelles
@RogerPielkeJr
2
4
20
1) Design to Win, Theranos, WeWork, Effective Altruism, Bitcoin, FTX —> How blind can scientists, journalists, philanthropists be to such obvious BS hype? Or to moral philosophers preaching a technocratic, religious scientism?
@Revkin
@scheufele
@RogerPielkeJr
@Horganism
3
4
20
The pathological group-think among behavioral scientists for communicating "consensus" is mind numbing
#scicomm
Shut down the online surveys + data viz + read the 50 yrs of
#STS
/
#scicomm
lit. FYI
@farooquema
@brossardd
@scheufele
3
1
20
1) Great work via
@AU_SOC
's
@RosDonald
et al analyzing
#Miami
's local
#climate
narratives - providing model for studies of other cities FYI
@wihbey
@maxboykoff
@Revkin
@Fisher_DanaR
@MaibachEd
@jekotcher
@KLAkerlof
@NASEM_Climate
#scicomm
#envcomm
3
5
19
1)
@Vanya_Bisht
is doing incredibly useful and professional work in putting together this explainer videos on key concepts in environmental governance. HT
@SushantYaduka
5
4
17
@leahstokes
6) It's also odd that Michael Mann served as Editor of the your PNAS review since he lacks relevant social science expertise -- and it also explains why a qualified editor did not spot the obvious problems with the analysis.
@Revkin
@Fisher_DanaR
@scheufele
@brossardd
1
2
18
I very much appreciate the endorsement of
@jonhaidt
of my Wealth of Ideas newsletter + podcast exploring moderation in an age of extremes. His books, research + example has been a strong influence on my approach to research, public scholarship, teaching and life.
I really like Matthew Nisbet's deeply thoughtful approach to wicked problems, specializing in environmental issues. I just subscribed to his new substack, which opens with a manifesto in praise of moderation:
11
23
135
0
0
17
Hi
@Sander_vdLinden
— Hoping you can clarify your role relative to the alleged "sock pocketing" of your entry at
#Wikipedia
. As an academic and
#misinfo
/
#scicomm
researcher, it's important you clarify if the person in question is you. According to the Wikipedians, there is a
Sander: More on the issue of edits to
@Sander_vdLinden
#Wikipedia
page are at this link. Would be good to hear your thoughts on this.
0
1
5
0
5
17
@leahstokes
@Revkin
@Fisher_DanaR
@scheufele
@brossardd
7) These details on conflicts + editing of review process relate to the flawed premises that frame your study: oppo to WP is universally "bad" + needs to be overcome; it is irrational, self-interested NIMBYism led by white men + is unjust/racist by harming BIPOC
1
3
16
@CaulfieldTim
Tim - we should catch up sometime.
@danwilliamsphil
is on solid ground with his critique — and it is in line with concerns shared by senior scholars in the
#scicomm
field doing work since late '90s including me,
@scheufele
,
@brossard
,
@DeclanFahy10
+ many others. In fact his
2
2
17
1) The
@NYTimesOpEd
's "World on Fire" instagram-like slideshow of "climate change" driven disaster is a form of journalistic misinformation that is incredibly reckless + irresponsible
@SaffronJONeill
@maxboykoff
@scheufele
@brossardd
@Revkin
@bud_ward
2
6
17
When scientific institutions turn science into a partisan brand -- see also classic papers by
@UW_LSC
prof
@tpn1818
; +
@CSPO_ASU
's D. Sarewitz
@ISSUESinST
FYI
@Revkin
@scheufele
@brossardd
@maxboykoff
“In 2020, Nature endorsed Joe Biden in the US presidential election. A survey finds that viewing the endorsement did not change people’s views of the candidates, but caused some to lose confidence in Nature and in US scientists generally”
@ArthurLupia
1
17
58
0
4
17
Honestly c'mon guys
@STWong
@johnfcook
--
@ConversationUS
: You are now positioning yourselves as part of the "climate science heroes to martyrs" narrative that frames almost everything Oreskes/Mann write?
1) Like in the case of nudging, social priming and
"It is perhaps unsurprising there is now a new frontier in the attacks on scientists who seek to uphold the evidence-based integrity of democracy. It involves attacks and allegations of bias against misinformation researchers."
@STWorg
@johnfocook
5
31
57
1
5
15
@leahstokes
5) Why not declare these conflicts of interest? They matter since will address, they appear to shape + mirror the assumptions by which you ask questions about wind power opposition + that create blind spots + errors in your analysis, interpretation + framing.
1
4
17
A few thoughts on this study. I have CCed the authors
@joshnewell
+
@Dimitris_Goun
for their replies, along with
@scheufele
@Revkin
@RogerPielkeJr
@Kaiping_Chen
@OMGBEARSS
@tpn1818
@danwilliamsphil
@davidlazer
@matthewgburgess
@brossardd
for additional thoughts.
-->Please let
@Revkin
@scheufele
@brossardd
@mcnisbet
I say above, Yale has been tracking these exact stats since 2009 in the national population and the numbers match.
However, if researchers were able to access more recent data from X, I’m pretty sure the numbers would skew higher.
0
1
12
3
9
15
Hats off to
@UMaine
paleoecologist
@JacquelynGill
for this wonderful essay -- demonstrating at a high level the craft of creative non-fiction and science writing [Discovered by way of
@revkin
's post at the new platform that shall not be named here].
1
2
16
This table from the paper summarizes differences in problem framing, views on tech + politics, and social change among those arguing for action on climate change
Somebody should do a serious anthropological study on climate-tech tribalism.
What are the factors that drive and maintain tribal allegiance?
What characteristics best predict which tribe a newcomer would join?
To be successful, we need to get past climate-tech tribalism.
29
14
107
0
5
15
Here is the full thread on
@leahstokes
#PNAS
study about
#wind
power opposition on flaws/biases in assumptions, statistical analysis + reporting, and undisclosed conflict of interest concerns [It's reverse order - original thread is cut off]
@leahstokes
@MikhailaCalice
@brossardd
@PCSTNetwork
@iamClaudinePied
@Revkin
24) In contrast to their ethnographic work, the goal of your study is not to understand rural (white) publics -- but rather to stigmatize + de-legitimize their justice/governance concerns. It's research as political messaging to limit participation in siting decisions.
5
2
8
3
6
15
1)
@AFP
makes reckless decision to run article on Nov 2020 partial draft of 4K word IPCC report. Scientists who have not read report, agree to comment. The
@guardian
,
@AlJazeera_World
@Independent
run stories based on
@AFP
article. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO JOURNO + SCIENTIFIC ETHICS?
2
2
16
On this one I disagree w/ my good friend
@MaibachEd
-- national emergency framing opens a pandora's box of unanticipated political implications -- plus it will be an emergency that will never end in our lifetimes, a perpetual state of metaphorical "emergency" and "war."
.
@SenJeffMerkley
Like you, a solid majority of Americans support the POTUS declaring climate change to be a national emergency.
@Mason4C
@YaleClimateComm
@ecotone2
@docsforclimate
1
2
7
2
0
15
1) This is an incredibly useful -- and accurate -- first-hand perspective
@TheFP
from
@PatrickTBrown31
on the types of calculations that every researcher across fields engages in when writing up a study.
#scicomm
1
3
15
This podcast series w/ transcript looks excellent. FYI
#scicomm
#evcomm
#polcomm
@scheufele
@brossardd
@tpn1818
0
16
15
1) On Fri. 1/15 at 1pm EST I will be joining
@UWMadisonCALS
's
@brossardd
for a
#FB
,
#YouTube
#LinkedIn
LIVE discussion of --
#SciComm
in a Disrupted Democracy-- w/
@earthinstitute
's Andrew
@Revkin
FYI
@Northeastern
@NU_CAMD
@NU_PolicySchool
3
3
15
1) Regardless of where you stand on the merits of climate scientist Michael Mann's defamation suit — you should be troubled by the absence of substantive news coverage of the trial that is now heading into its third week.
#scicomm
#sciencecommunication
#envcomm
#climatecomm
5
2
14
2) This table is a good checklist for advocates + journalists to consult in thinking about likely reasons for local opposition to wind power
@revkin
@JesseJenkins
@billmckibben
@maxboykoff
@pwrhungry
@dgelles
@RogerPielkeJr
@tylerhnorris
1
1
15
Instead of engaging with the substantive, detailed concerns I raise about her
#PNAS
study - Leah Stokes has instead decided to block me. She is happy to use X as a platform for promotion + advocacy but not for critical, evidence-based discussion of her research.
Here is the full thread on
@leahstokes
#PNAS
study about
#wind
power opposition on flaws/biases in assumptions, statistical analysis + reporting, and undisclosed conflict of interest concerns [It's reverse order - original thread is cut off]
3
6
15
4
0
15
2) Why are you coding this statement as a denialist/contrarian claim? "nuclear power is safe/good for soc/econ/enviro"
@brossardd
@scheufele
@maxboykoff
@mss7676
@Revkin
@SciReports
1
2
14
Dear
@juliaradio
: Instead of reporting on the particulars of the 4-week trial including the witness testimony, documents from discovery, and judge's admonishments of Mann's legal team— you turned to a Mann collaborator
@PeterHotez
to offer listeners/readers a misleading Manichean
Climate scientist Michael Mann is suing for defamation in court : my comments with
@juliaradio
@NPR
4
46
186
2
8
13
.
@ClimateOutreach
founded by
@climategeorge
does some of the best work at the intersection of climate, comm + engagement w/ great researchers like
@JamieWClarke
+
@AJCorner
. So I am really looking forward to this event w/
@OxClimateSoc
.
@TheIECA
#scicomm
1
13
13
Excellent from
@TedNordhaus
--
#climateemergency
blindness has moved goalposts to improbable 1.5C just as 2C seems possible Such "useful idiocies" not only lead to overpromising, but are dangerous, as I wrote
@SubstackInc
2
2
14
More on clashing views + interests at local level that will slow decarbonization push: "I don't know anyone that wants to be a guinea pig for this stuff," says Dustin Delano, vice president of the Maine Lobstermen's Association
2
4
13
This is an outstanding analysis via
@katedooley0
+
@doreenstabinsky
on why "natural climate solutions" as carbon removal are not able to live up to their hype via
@ConversationUS
0
7
13
1) My essay on "Manufacturing Consent" continues to stir debate w/
@theresphysics
justifiably asking what evidence is there that authoritarians like Modi are using the
#climateemergency
as a pretext justify human rights abuses. FYI
@Revkin
2
7
14
This is a terrific new edited volume and related panel discussion on Ireland and climate change focusing on the political and communication dimensions with an
#ecomodernist
emphasis. Great work
@DPMRobbins
+ team. FYI
@Revkin
@maxboykoff
#envcomm
#scicomm
If you've had enough of Christmas movies & missed the launch earlier this month of our new book, Ireland and the
#ClimateCrisis
, now is your opportunity to catch up!
Hear what
@EamonRyan
,
@shine_tara
,
@markfoleyce
&
@DaireKeogh
had to say here:
2
8
28
0
6
13
The most important book in years on climate + society is published this month by
@politybooks
: Mike Hulme's Climate Change Isn't Everything Catch a preview of his arguments via
@Revkin
's recent Sustain What? intervew
1
2
13
In my first
@SubstackInc
essay, I discuss how
@zenahitz
's terrific
@PrincetonUPress
book "Lost in Thought" helped me reframe my focus for the project. It's a book every academic [+others] should read.
1
4
13
These trends reveal the simplicity of metaphors like "war on science," "culture of anti-science" in American society. Yes there are specific contentious issues where partisans dismiss clear expert advice, but science + technology overall still viewed as essential to progress.
US federal 2021 R&D spending near a 45-year high (top 5) as a percentage of GDP ⤵️
3
3
3
2
7
13
@Sander_vdLinden
@GordPennycook
@jayvanbavel
@danwilliamsphil
@Sacha_Altay
@Ben_Tappin
@CameronBrick
@michaelvandenb6
@DG_Rand
@BrendanNyhan
This study has several major flaws that should have ruled out publication and that are obvious to spot.
I have CCed into the thread the study's lead author
@lstoetze
+ Nature Climate Change EIC
@bdwake
for replies and discussion.
As always, I welcome disagreement and
5
2
11
"Why I am leaving academia" by
@RogerPielkeJr
—
@CUBoulder
/
@CUBoulderENVS
is losing a world-class researcher, academic leader, and public intellectual of the highest character + integrity. He is impossible to replace — and it saddens me to learn of his retirement at the age of
0
1
12
Stuff gets crazier + crazier — It's 2023 & some scholars are actually trying to rehabilitate Malthus & Ehrlich as misunderstood + co-opted by Eugenicsts, arguing a "global approach" to population control can be free of racism + nationalism FYI
@yadugar_
5
2
13
2)
@UCUSA
does good work -- But someone at an advocacy group which has a similar policy agenda cannot be relied on to carefully scrutinize Mann's claims.
@ScienceMagazine
's readers deserve better + decision reflects tacit endorsement, rather duty to evaluate.
3
2
13
A great example of climate determinism & RCP8.5 cycle of hype:
@TheLancetPlanet
study uses RCP2.6-SSP1, RCP4.5-SSP2, and RCP8.5-SSP5 scenarios to estimate venomous snake migration + increased risk of snake bites in SE Asia & Africa. The main text visualizes only the RCP8.5
2
3
12
5) In fact, research shows that the use of war metaphors by scientists like
@MichaelEMann
harms the credibility of climate scientists -- see study by
@APPCPenn
's
@brucewhardy
,
@CommDeptMSU
's
@JohnBesley
+
@TUKleincollege
's
@tmeghnaa
#scicomm
#envcomm
0
3
12
This visual from
@revkin
reminds me I need to switch my
@nytimes
subscription back to 7 days/week print delivery -- mounds of studies show we learn more + exposed to more diverse stories when we read NP's in print [+ avoid algorithm-driven news framing used to stoke our emotions]
Just in case you doubted these have been momentous months....
6
44
200
1
2
12
1) The first in a weekly series of essays in which I critically explore
#climateemergency
politics. I lead off by questioning
@UNFCCC
's decision to call for emergency declarations + for naming Indian PM Narendra Modi "Champion of the Earth"
#pcst
#scicomm
3
5
12
@DarrinADurant
@RogerPielkeJr
@joshnewell
@Revkin
@Dimitris_Goun
@scheufele
@Kaiping_Chen
@OMGBEARSS
@tpn1818
@danwilliamsphil
@davidlazer
@matthewgburgess
@brossardd
Hi Darrin -- Just as I argue against the use of "denier" labeling, I also argue against labels like "alarmists" etc.
Have you read/watched Oppenheimer?
The use of labels like "denier," "luke warmer" etc parallels what Oppenheimer endured during the 1940s and 1950s — and I
2
3
12
Excellent study uncovering the fall promises & hype of mindfulness apps FYI
@jmreagle
@CaulfieldTim
HT
@ronpurser
2
5
12
@Prof_FSultana
I disagree on this one. How would you refer to the Hamas attackers who massacred civilians and beheaded babies? It's possible to both be critical of Israel's past actions + current retaliation and condemn Hamas, no?
5
0
9
2) First, since it relates to how you frame your study, the variables included, results interpreted -- I am wondering why neither of you declared any conflicts of interest related to your funding sources + net zero advocacy work?
1
2
12
See also "Emergence of Science as Political Brand" by
@UW_LSC
's
@tpn1818
+ other work via
@brossardd
@askellyphd
@zfurnas
@timlapira
From
@mcnisbet
in 2015: "AAAS membership also has a strong partisan skew with 55 percent identifying as a Democrat, 32 percent as Independent, and only 6 percent as Republican"
2
2
6
0
8
12
Being able to trade ideas & arguments + catch up with world class
#heterodox
thinkers like
@Fisher_DanaR
+
@Revkin
is just one of great opportunities that
@theNASEM
's
#climatecrossroads
will catalyze
#scicomm
#envcomm
#climatecomm
0
1
12
This is incredible: Michael Mann's statements in this Dec. 2021
@democracynow
interview suggest that the world's best-known climate scientist does not understand the difference between the probability of an extreme event and its impact/harm.
------
As he
Bonkers
"If you look at the total impact of climate change around the world, wildfires, droughts, floods, heat waves, coastal inundation, climate change is already costing more lives than COVID-19. It is deadlier." (25:44)
COVID-19 = ~18m deaths
24
53
185
3
5
11
This 2014 piece by
@PatrickDeneen
is in line w/ Sarewitz's "Rightful Place of Science" + article photo neatly captures "science as political brand" by
@tpn1818
FYI
@brossardd
@scheufele
@Revkin
@RogerPielkeJr
1
3
11
I am honored to be named a Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) fellow, an org founded in 1976 + publisher of
@SkeptInquirer
magazine -- joining my good friend
@CaulfieldTim
+ a stellar roster of thinkers that has included Sagan, Asimov etc
#scicomm
0
3
11
Based in S. Portland -- it is great to see
@shankman
joining
@BostonGlobe
to complement
@davabel
's enviro/climate coverage [who is among the best on the beat]
2
4
10