Denialism

Thanks to Alex Palazzo for alerting me to the article The Paranoid Style in American Science by Daniel Engber of Slate. This is a three-part series on radical skepticism and the rise of conspiratorial thinking about science. Unfortunately it is all too familiar. As Alex notes, the series discusses how certain people (i.e. climate skeptics, the ID movement, and the tobacco industry) have cultivated a notion of super-skepticism in an attempt to discredit current scientific consensus. Sadly, crop genetic engineering has also often been the target of such attacks. The book I wrote with my husband…
The word is spreading- we can feed the world without damaging it, if we can entertain some new ideas. Check out Paul Voosen's article in the NYT and let me know what you think.
This discussion between Michael Specter & Chris Mooney pointed me to an interesting new book, Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives. Instead of Global Warming or Creationism, Specter addresses less pervasively disputatious issues such as genetically modified food, the anti-vaccination movement and the politics of the FDA approval process (at least judging from the discussion). Mooney & Specter also point to the reality that denialism exists in Blue America (though anyone who has followed the dabbling of the Huffington…
Of all the myriad climate skeptic arguments out there, the argument that the current rise in CO2 is not human caused truly is one of the most ridiculous positions one could take. (Please note, I am not saying it is ridiculous to consider, we should consider everything, but like wondering if the light in the fridge really turns off when you close the door, a quick check with your cell phone video camera really should put it to rest!) It is of course one of the standard denials in the HTTTACS series. I am closing comments on that thread and directing them here, as surprising as it is to me…
It's good news though! A description of the tactics and appropriate response to denialism was published in the European Journal of Public Health by authors Pascal Diethelm and Martin McKee. It's entitled "Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?" and I think it does an excellent job explaining the harms of deniailsm, critical elements of denialism, as well as providing interesting historical examples of corporate denialism on the part of tobacco companies. HIV does not cause AIDS. The world was created in 4004 BCE. Smoking does not cause cancer. And if climate change is…
Brought to us by The Onion San Francisco Historians Condemn 1906 Earthquake Deniers: The 1906 Earthquake Deniers, a group reviled by Californians and scholars alike, held three days of lectures and roundtable discussions over what they call a "century-long hoax" of exaggerated seismic activity in the Bay area, and part of a conspiracy to bring the World's Fair to San Francisco in 1915. Historians protested the conference, saying the organization's statements denying any major seismic activity in 1906 are reprehensible and out of line with all available geologic data from the time. ... "If an…
I'm heartened to see a broad disgust with George Will's lies about climate science. After all it's pretty extraordinary when a major syndicated columnist repeats a lie about science, not once, not twice but three times despite being corrected. PZ wishes he too could just make up his own facts, and Mike too is pleased the disgust is moving beyond the scientific community. Carl Zimmer at the Loom covers the broad mistakes made in the essay, and TPM documents how it was almost all lies. Mark Kleimen has caught on to the fact that in the end, this is just another conspiracy theory on par with…
One of the more promising trends I've seen is that the various forms of denialism that scientists regularly decry (including those of us here at ScienceBlogs) are starting to be recognized by non-scientists. I don't know if there's a direct cause-and-effect here, or if like-minded people are coming up with the same idea (the most depressing cause would be if this got started with a stupid blog comment...). Anyway, I bring you public policy professor Mark Kleiman (italics mine): One largely unremarked aspect of global-warming denialism (as exemplified by George Will and demolished by Mike…
A special court has reached a decision: vaccines don't cause autism. On one side were families with sad and tragic anecdotes of children with serious developmental disabilities, and on the other… The government argued during the 2007 bench trials that the plaintiffs' claims linking the vaccines with autism are not supported by "good science." Likewise, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization and the Institute of Medicine have found no credible link between vaccinations and autism. It does not diminish the pain the families have gone through, but it's…
I have to admit I'm somewhat surprised (even if Orac isn't). We all knew that Andrew Wakefield's research was bogus and the link between vaccines and autism was engineered by ideologues who fear vaccines irrationally. But fabrication of data? Sloppy research is one thing, but the need for cranks to be correct, no matter what reality reflects, has resulted in yet another example of egregious dishonesty. This is in line, however, with what we know about cranks. Mark Crislip recently wrote an interesting piece on mathematics crankery which bears upon just this phenomenon. Mathematics is a…
If you want to know where the current ridiculous anti-vaccination scare came from, there's one well known source: Andrew Wakefield. He published a paper in 1998 that claimed there was a link between vaccination and autism that was a popular sensation, and had a dramatic effect. Despite involving just a dozen children, the 1998 paper's impact was extraordinary. After its publication, rates of inoculation fell from 92% to below 80%. Populations acquire "herd immunity" from measles when more than 95% of people have been vaccinated. Last week official figures showed that 1,348 confirmed cases…
An investigation by the Sunday Times (UK) indicates that the doctor who reported information suggesting a link between MMR vaccine and autism may have "misreproted results in his research." The investigation purpots to show that ... ...Andrew Wakefield manipulated patients' data, which triggered fears that the MMR triple vaccine to protect against measles, mumps and rubella was linked to the condition. The research [originally] claimed that the families of eight out of 12 children attending a routine clinic at the hospital had blamed MMR for their autism, and said that problems came on…
Here is Bishop Richard Williamson speaking just last week. This is the kind of gentleman of high character the Pope would see in a leadership position in the Catholic church, since he did revoke his prior excommunication. I think he'll fit right in with the pedophiles and other reprobates who find a haven in the church. (via Do Not Trust Me)
A study recently published by Irva Hertz-Picciotto and Lora Delwiche of the M.I.N.D. Institute, UC Davis, addresses the question of an apparent rise in the frequency of diagnosed autism in California. This study is quickly becoming the focus of attention as the various factions with an interest in autism square off on assessing its validity. In the mean time, the study itself is rather modest in what it attempts and what it concludes. Let's have a look. To date, there are three kinds of explanations given for this rise in Autism rate: 1) There is some artifact in the system such as…
It seems Obama didn't get Nisbet's memo. Just watching on CNN, future president Obama says: The time for delay is over, the time for denial is over. We all believe what the scientists have been telling us for years now, that this is a matter of urgency and national security and it has to be dealt with in a serious way. That is what I intend my administration to do. I think what is exciting about this conversation is that it is not only a problem but an opportunity. I can not be happier that we have a president who is willing to stand up and call global warming denialism what it is.
As a physician, few things frustrate and sadden me as much as preventable deaths. I see it all the time---the guy who kept putting off his colonoscopy and was later diagnosed with metastatic colon cancer, the woman who put off coming to the doctor with her breast lump until it broke through her skin, the heart patient who couldn't stop smoking. They all haunt me. But what if the ghosts were numbered in the hundreds of thousands rather than dozens? That's what it must be like to be Thabo Mbeki, that is if he has a conscience. It may (or may not) be bad "framing" to call someone a "…
This is just one of dozens of responses to common climate change denial arguments, which can all be found at How to Talk to a Climate Sceptic.Objection: In October, 2008, Al Gore's science advisor, James Hansen announced yet another "hottest" month on record. After all the alarmist banner headlines sank in, yet another "correction" quietly contradicted this, and October was not particularily warm after all. This is yet another example of why the temperature record can not be trusted. Answer: Wow. Where to begin with this one? There are many versions of this myth around already at the time of…
How far do you have to lower your standards if you are the Heartland Institute and want four Texans for a list of "experts" on global warming? Pretty low. Despite "dozens if not hundreds" of working climate scientists in Texas, to get four deniers for their list, the Heartland Institute had to use an energy expert, a policy analyst, an emergency physician and a petroleum engineer! Like damning with faint praise, that list says alot about the opinions of the actual community of experts.
In the last days of the Bush Administration, expect it to engage in lots of rulemaking. Many businesses will seek new rules for their industries now, fearing that less favorable outcomes will occur if they chance it with the Obama Administration. This business-initiated regulation will seek "ceiling preemption," meaning that the federal rules will supersede and cap strong state regulations. Preemption has a profound effect on consumer protection, because frankly speaking, Congress rarely takes the time to pass consumer protection laws. It has other important business, and there is a horde…
In reading a law review last week, I saw a footnote to a booked called Cyberselfish, A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High-Tech. Intrigued, I purchased it immediately and have been reading it the law few nights. The author, Paulina Borsook, wrote for Wired and yet was shocked by some of the socioretardation in the Silicon Valley tech community. She published this book in 2000; it's a significant expansion of her 1996 Mother Jones article on the same topic, which concludes: ...Just as 19th-century timber and cattle and mining robber barons made their fortunes from…