| Revision as of 17:33, 1 May 2008 edit138.163.0.42 (talk) →Science and society essay← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:58, 1 May 2008 edit undoVanished user 47736712 (talk | contribs)2,050 editsm Reverted to revision 209477825 by Apis O-tang; See talk, gore may not be notable from a scientific pov, but most people have seen that movie, also outside usa. (TW)Next edit → | ||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
| </ref> | </ref> | ||
| In the essay she reported an analysis of “928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003 and published in the ] database with the keywords ‘global climate change’”.<ref name="science-essay" /> The essay stated the analysis was to test the hypothesis that the drafting of reports and statements by societies such as the ], ] and ] might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions on ]. After the analysis, she concluded that 75 percent of the examined abstracts either explicitly or implicitly backed the consensus view, while none directly dissented from it. | In the essay she reported an analysis of “928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003 and published in the ] database with the keywords ‘global climate change’”.<ref name="science-essay" /> The essay stated the analysis was to test the hypothesis that the drafting of reports and statements by societies such as the ], ] and ] might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions on ]. After the analysis, she concluded that 75 percent of the examined abstracts either explicitly or implicitly backed the consensus view, while none directly dissented from it. The essay received a great deal of media attention from around the world and has been cited by many prominent persons such as ] in the movie '']''. | ||
| In 2007, Oreskes expanded her analysis, stating that approximately 20 percent of abstracts explicitly endorsed the consensus on climate change that: "Earth's climate is being affected by human activities". In addition, 55 percent of abstracts "implicitly" endorsed the consensus by engaging in research to characterize the ongoing and/or future impact of climate change (50 percent of abstracts) or to mitigate against predicted changes (5 percent). The remaining 25 percent either focused on paleoclimate (10) or developing measurement techniques (15) and Oreskes considered these to be agnostic on the reality of climate change.<ref>{{cite book | In 2007, Oreskes expanded her analysis, stating that approximately 20 percent of abstracts explicitly endorsed the consensus on climate change that: "Earth's climate is being affected by human activities". In addition, 55 percent of abstracts "implicitly" endorsed the consensus by engaging in research to characterize the ongoing and/or future impact of climate change (50 percent of abstracts) or to mitigate against predicted changes (5 percent). The remaining 25 percent either focused on paleoclimate (10) or developing measurement techniques (15) and Oreskes considered these to be agnostic on the reality of climate change.<ref>{{cite book | ||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
| | date = December 26, 2004 | | date = December 26, 2004 | ||
| | url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26065-2004Dec25.html }}</ref> | | url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26065-2004Dec25.html }}</ref> | ||
| Her work is claimed to be discredited as follows from the Financial Post, Lawrence Solomon, Published: Saturday, April 12, 2008, "Oreskes's paper -- which claimed to comprehensively examine all articles in a scientific database with the keywords "climate change" -- is nonsense. As FP readers know, for the last 18 months I have been profiling scientists who disagree with the UN panel's position. My Deniers series, which now runs to some 40 columns, describes many of the world's most prominent scientists. They include authors or reviewers for the UN panel (before they quit in disgust). They even include the scientist known as the father of scientific climatology, who is recognized as being the most cited climatologist in the world. Yet somehow Oreskes missed every last one of these exceptions to the presumed consensus, and somehow so did the peer reviewers that Science chose to evaluate Oreskes's work." | |||
| He also states that Misplaced Pages is not allowing this discreditation to be inserted her, stating, "Kim Dabelstein Petersen. She (or he?) is an editor at Misplaced Pages. What does she edit? Reams and reams of global warming pages. I started checking them. In every instance I checked, she defended those warning of catastrophe and deprecated those who believe the science is not settled. I investigated further. Others had tried to correct her interpretations and had the same experience as I -- no sooner did they make their corrections than she pounced, preventing Misplaced Pages readers from reading anyone's views but her own. When they protested plaintively, she wore them down and snuffed them out." | |||
| ==Selected Awards, Honors, and Fellowships== | ==Selected Awards, Honors, and Fellowships== | ||
Revision as of 17:58, 1 May 2008
| Naomi Oreskes | |
|---|---|
| Alma mater | Imperial College, University of London Stanford University |
| Scientific career | |
| Fields | Science History, Economic geology |
| Institutions | Stanford University U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S National Academy of Sciences Dartmouth College Harvard University New York University University of California San Diego |
Naomi Oreskes is a Professor of History and Science Studies at the University of California San Diego.
Background
Oreskes received her Bachelor of Science in Mining Geology from the Royal School of Mines of Imperial College, University of London in 1981, and worked as a Research Assistant in the Geology Department and as a Teaching Assistant in the departments of Geology, Philosophy and Applied Earth Sciences at Stanford University starting in 1984. She received her PhD in the Graduate Special Program in Geological Research and History of Science at Stanford in 1990. She received a National Science Foundation's Young Investigator Award in 1994.
She has worked as a consultant for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S National Academy of Sciences, and has also taught at Dartmouth, Harvard and New York University (NYU). She is also a member of the History of Science Society. She is the author or has contributed to a number of essays and technical reports in economic geology and science history in addition to three books:
- Plate Tectonics: An Insider’s History of the Modern Theory of the Earth, Edited with Homer Le Grand) (2003) Westview Press, ISBN 0-8133-4132-9
- The Rejection of Continental Drift: Theory and Method in American Earth Science (1999) Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-511733-6
- Perspectives on Geophysics, Special Issue of Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 31B, Oreskes, Naomi and James R. Fleming, eds. 2000.
Sixth College
On February 5, 2008, it was announced that Oreskes would become the second Sixth College Provost effective July 1, 2008.
Science and society essay
Oreskes wrote an essay on science and society Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change in the journal Science in December 2004.
In the essay she reported an analysis of “928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003 and published in the ISI database with the keywords ‘global climate change’”. The essay stated the analysis was to test the hypothesis that the drafting of reports and statements by societies such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, American Association for the Advancement of Science and National Academy of Sciences might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions on anthropogenic climate change. After the analysis, she concluded that 75 percent of the examined abstracts either explicitly or implicitly backed the consensus view, while none directly dissented from it. The essay received a great deal of media attention from around the world and has been cited by many prominent persons such as Al Gore in the movie an inconvenient truth.
In 2007, Oreskes expanded her analysis, stating that approximately 20 percent of abstracts explicitly endorsed the consensus on climate change that: "Earth's climate is being affected by human activities". In addition, 55 percent of abstracts "implicitly" endorsed the consensus by engaging in research to characterize the ongoing and/or future impact of climate change (50 percent of abstracts) or to mitigate against predicted changes (5 percent). The remaining 25 percent either focused on paleoclimate (10) or developing measurement techniques (15) and Oreskes considered these to be agnostic on the reality of climate change.
Oreskes responded to some criticisms, including those from Richard Lindzen, with an editorial in The Washington Post.
Selected Awards, Honors, and Fellowships
- George Sarton Award Lecture, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2004
- American Philosophical Society Sabbatical Fellowship, 2001-2002.
- National Science Foundation Young Investigator Award, 1994-1999.
- National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship for University Teachers, 1993-94.
- Society of Economic Geologists Lindgren Prize for outstanding work by a young scientist, 1993.
- Ritter Memorial Fellowship in History of Marine Sciences, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 1994.
- Listed, Who’s Who in American Science and Engineering, Who’s Who in the West.
References
- historyweb.ucsd.edu
- "Appointment of Sixth College Provost". University of California, San Diego. 2008-02-05. Retrieved 2008-04-29.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ Naomi Oreskes (December 3, 2004). "Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change". Science. 306 (5702): 1686. doi:10.1126/science.1103618.
See also:
- Oreskes, N. Beyond the Ivory Tower, The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change (including corrections), 21 January 2005, (Retrieved 24 April 2008)
- Exchange of letters to Science
- Oreskes, Naomi (2007). "The scientific consensus on climate change: How do we know we're not wrong?". In Joseph F. DiMento, Pamela Doughman (ed.). Climate Change. MIT Press. ISBN 026204241X.
- Oreskes, Naomi (December 26, 2004). "Undeniable Global Warming". Washington Post: B07.
External links
- Oreskes page at UCSD
- Naomi Oreskes, 2007, The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We’re Not Wrong? Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren, edited by Joseph F. C. DiMento and Pamela Doughman, MIT Press, pp. 65-99.