Skeptic?

Sometimes I have been confused by people referring to themselves as climate skeptics. What does it mean to be a skeptic? If someone refers to himself as a climate skeptic, it infers to me they are conferring upon themselves intellectual credibility. How do you know this person deserves credibility?

There are people who strive to bring respectability to skepticism. About 27 years ago an organization was formed called the Skeptics Society. They are an organization formed by learned citizens who simply want to get to the bottom of things. They  were and still are concerned that legitimate science is under attack while unsupportable pseudo-science, superstition, and irrational beliefs are being accepted as truth by American citizens.  

Another group who is deeply concerned about the meaning of skepticism are scientists.  Any work completed by a scientist, can only be accepted in the science community by running the gauntlet of peer reviewal. Each scientist knows and expects the world-wide science community to examine his work. He or she also knows his work will not be accepted until his peers have examined all the facts. Broadly speaking, scientists will agree, disagree, or withhold judgement on any work put forth in reputable science journals. This commitment to legitimate skepticism is the great check and balance in the science community.

I think it is interesting that the original Greek word, skeptikas, simply means to “reflect on”. All scientists who review works of science are reflecting on their peer’s work. (By the way, most scientists do this “reflecting” without pay out of a sense of duty to the dignity of their profession.)

More scientists and scientific bodies have reviewed the science  on climate than any other science subject since the dawn of man. That is why it is so important for us lay people to understand 97% of the practicing climate scientists, by agreeing on this vast body of work, is an important statistic.

 Therefore, scientists and legitimate skeptics bristle when weakly educated people in the science, like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Senator Inofe, or our President claim to be skeptics. These people deem themselves worthy the title of skeptic without having the education or experience to qualify themselves to the title. To set the record straight, and more importantly correct future publishing errors, the membership of the Skeptics Society petitioned the Associated Press International, API, in 2015 to help clear the air in science journalism. They asked the API to review the science and judge for themselves whether the word skeptic could be used to describe these people who denied the evidence. The API recognized the overwhelming data. In their stylebook the API cautioned journalists not to use the term climate skeptic in their articles but should use the term climate doubter.

Recently the highly respected and independent newspaper, the Guardian, changed their stylebook too. They cautioned their contributing journalists not to give climate change naysayers the title skeptic but only the term climate denier should be used.

Additionally, after reviewing the recent reports from our US National Academies of Science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the last US climate assessment by our United States Science agencies, the science editors have deemed the terms climate change and global warming as terms unable to convey the serious situation we are in. The Guardian warns us we should not use these terms. They advise science journalists to use words more appropriate to the climate challenge we face.  They recommend the more accurate and mobilizing terms such as climate emergency, climate crisis, climate breakdown or global heating.

If we fail to aggressively mitigate our use of fossil fuels, I wonder what terms will be appropriate to describe the world we and our kids will experience in the next decade?

It was just announced that June of 2019 was the hottest June on record. (world-wide average). This means 9 out of 10 Junes, since 2010, are the hottest on record.

This should give us something to “reflect on”.

When you meet someone who refers to him of herself as a climate skeptic, or if they use the more appropriate term climate denier to describe themselves, simply ask how he or she came to the conclusion(s) they hold. It will not take long to figure out if they are worthy of the title skeptic.