Two years ago Peter Hadfield began a series of videos on YouTube to explain the science, and rebut urban myths that spin round the internet and end up on the opinion pages of the Daily Express and the Wall Street Journal. The result has been astonishing. My channel, Potholer54, now has over 27,000 subscribers. The videos have been mirrored by others all over the internet, and several university lecturers have asked if they can use it in their environmental science classes. Most importantly, former skeptics tell me the videos have changed their minds about the reality of climate change.
That success, however, comes at a price. It means looking at the science – not scary and unrealistic images of submerged cities. It means accepting the fact that Al Gore is not always right, and he should not be defended when he's wrong. It means acknowledging that while skeptics like Christopher Monckton and Martin Durkin fabricate a lot of their facts, many environmental activists tend to exaggerate theirs.
Of course, the evidence clearly shows that the climate is changing, largely because of man-made gases. And the consequences are likely to be dire. But exaggerating them – and being caught out – is not the way to gain public understanding or trust. As a science journalist I could not, with a clear conscience, report that the melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice caps will drown most of Florida (as Al Gore does in An Inconvenient Truth) without pointing out that this is not likely to happen for thousands of years.
The result of this candour is that a lot of skeptics trust the Potholer54 channel, and appreciate that they are not being talked down to, or badgered or lectured. I do not call them climate "deniers", which presupposes there is some irrefutable truth they are denying. But neither are they truly skeptics. They learn climate science the same way many schoolchildren learn about sex – from other kids. The only difference in the internet age is that the playground got bigger.
Without question they skeptically believe dubious sources like Fox News, the Daily Express and amateur blogs. A parade of scientists (never mind if they have degrees in microbiology or metallurgy) tell them that ocean cycles are responsible for global warming, or that there is no warming at all, or that even if there is there is nothing to worry about.
Spend just a few days in this bizarre world of disinformation and it is hard to understand how the audience could not come to the conclusion that anthropogenic climate change is a hoax. And if it is a hoax, the next obvious conclusion is that climate scientists must be either stupid or in it for the money. Deconstructing all this spurious guff, one myth at a time, means checking it back to its source, finding the errors, and then pitting it against proper research studies. No need for condescention, insult, or appeals to emotion.
...Science is science because the knowledge we acquire comes from experimentation and observation, not guesswork, belief and hearsay. Sadly, most newspapers dispensed with a dedicated science correspondent years ago...please read full at the Guardian
