Donna Laframboise here at No Frakking Consensus refers us to a recent article on a “scientific study” that confirms dissent and skepticism over climate science is spreading globally and rapidly – in the form of books.
In the field of science that’s really good news because that’s how science progresses. It’s also essential for assuring a thriving democracy and holding off tyrants.
But it’s not good for devout global warming followers, like Cristine Russell of the Columbia Journalism Review, or the two authors of a new peer-reviewed paper by Riley E. Dunlap of Oklahoma State University and Peter J. Jacques of the University of Central Florida. Dunlap and Jacques’s paper was published in February by the journal American Behavioral Scientist and claims that conservative think-tanks are behind a wave of skeptical books now spreading across the globe.
One can’t help but get the impression that both of these American sociologists themselves are obsessed with the notion of a vast right-wing conspiracy being behind the global pandemic of sceptic climate books.
Although the two authors are abnormally hostile, aggressive and paranoid to those having a different opinion on climate science, their paper is a clear confirmation that climate science dissent and skepticism are alive and well globally.
Russell writes that “the authors noted that there had been an ‘explosion’ of books since 2007” since Al Gore’s AIT. “108 books were published between 1982 and 2010, half of them between 2005 and 2010, and 15 of them in 2010 alone.”
While 66 of the 108 climate denial books came from American authors (61 percent), another 19 books (18 percent) came from the UK, followed by seven from Canada, and six from Australia. The rest came from nations such as Denmark, France, Sweden, the Czech Republic, Germany, New Zealand, and the Netherlands. Since 2000, four of every 10 denial books have come from authors outside the US—evidence, say Dunlap and Jacques, of “the success of the US conservative movement in helping diffuse denial internationally.”
Thanks Ms Russell, Messieurs Dunlap and Jacques, for this very uplifting progress report. Hopefully someday you’ll see the benefits of dissent and open debate.