Home
Videos uploaded by user “UQx Denial101x Making Sense of Climate Science Denial”
Critical Thinking Cafe
 
03:13
Video abstract for paper "Deconstructing climate misinformation to identify reasoning errors" published in Environmental Research Letters by John Cook, Peter Ellerton, and David Kinkead. Full paper available at http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f
UQx DENIAL101x The Climate of Middle Earth - Part 2
 
08:28
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.4.3.1 Five Characteristics of Science Denial
 
09:17
Find out about the Five Characteristics of Science Denial, as outlined by Pascal Diethelm and Martin McKee, and originally conceived by Mark Hoofnagle. We'll also explore how unconscious biases can lead to those characteristics. Subtitles available: English, Slovenian, Portuguese About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Diethelm, P., & McKee, M. (2009). Denialism: What is it and how should scientists respond?. The European Journal of Public Health, 19(1), 2-4. http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/eurpub/19/1/2.full.pdf Kahan, D. M., Jenkins‐Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2011). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14(2), 147-174. http://climateinterpreter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Kahan,%20Jenkins-Smith%20and%20Braman%202010%20-%20Cultural%20cognition%20of%20scientific%20consensus.pdf Plous, S. (1991). Biases in the assimilation of technological breakdowns - do accidents make us safer. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(13), 1058-1082. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00459.x/abstract Talisse, R., & Aikin, S. F. (2006). Two forms of the straw man. Argumentation, 20(3), 345-352. http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/two_forms_of_the_straw_man.pdf Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). The rise of global warming skepticism: Exploring affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Analysis, 32(6), 1021-1032. http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Smith%20and%20Leiserowitz_Rise%20of%20GW%20Skepticism.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 6.3.3.1 Flu Shots
 
07:55
John Cook explains the most effective way to debunk misinformation: fight sticky myths with even stickier facts and structure your debunking argument in three parts: fact, then myth, then fallacy. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2007). Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. Random House. Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M. (1994). Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1420–1436. Tenney, E. R., Cleary, H. M. D., & Spellman, B. A. (2009). Unpacking the doubt in “beyond a reasonable doubt”: Plausible alternative stories increase not guilty verdicts. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1–8. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01973530802659687 McGuire, W. J., & Papageorgis, D. (1961). The relative efficacy of various types of prior belief-defense in producing immunity against persuasion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 26, 24-34. Banas, J. A., & Rains, S. A. (2010). A meta-analysis of research on inoculation theory. Communication Monographs, 77(3), 281-311. Diethelm, P., & McKee, M. (2009). Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?. The European Journal of Public Health, 19(1), 2-4.
UQx DENIAL101x Full interview with Steven Sherwood
 
30:48
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 4.4.1.1 Principles that models are built on
 
04:44
Dana Nuccitelli explains the principles that climate models are built on: fundamental physical laws. No one can know the future for certain, but these models allow us to make educated decisions looking forward. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: DOE/Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. (2014, November 12). Latest supercomputers enable high-resolution climate models, truer simulation of extreme weather. ScienceDaily. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141112144825.htm Manabe, S., & Wetherald, R.T. (1967). Thermal equilibrium of the atmosphere with a given distribution of relative humidity. Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, 24, 241–59. http://go.owu.edu/~chjackso/Climate/papers/Manabe_Wetherald_1967_Thermal%20equilibrium%20of%20the%20atmosphere%20with%20a%20given%20distribution%20of%20relative%20humidity.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 1.2.4.1 Knowledge Based Consensus
 
07:57
When should a consensus be considered scientific, or "knowledge-based"? When the pieces of the puzzle fit together, you have a consilience of evidence. When everyone is using the same standards of evidence and understanding the same terminology, you have social calibration. When agreement is widespread across many different groups of people from many different backgrounds, you have social diversity. When you have all three, you have a knowledge-based consensus and you can be confident that it’s correct. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Miller, B. (2013) When is Consensus Knowledge Based? Distinguishing Shared Knowledge from Mere Agreement. Synthese, 190(7): 1293-1316. http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11229-012-0225-5.pdf Oreskes, N. (1988). The rejection of continental drift. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, 311-348. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27757605?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Oreskes, N., & Wegener, A. (1999). The rejection of continental drift: Theory and method in American earth science. New York: Oxford University Press. http://media.hhmi.org/hl/12Lect2.html Oreskes, N. (2012, November). Building scientific knowledge: The story of plate tectonics. Howard Hughes Medical Institute Holiday Lectures on Science – Changing Planet: Past, Present, Future. Lecture conducted from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Chevy Chase, MD.
UQx DENIAL101x 2.4.3.1 Wavy Jet Stream
 
06:24
Keah Schuenemann explains what the jet stream and the "polar vortex" effect it is having in the United States. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Barnes, E. A. (2013). Revisiting the evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in midlatitudes. Geophysical Research Letters, 40(17), 4734-4739. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50880/abstract Cohen, J., Screen, J. A., Furtado, J. C., Barlow, M., Whittleston, D., Coumou, D., ... & Jones, J. (2014). Recent Arctic amplification and extreme mid-latitude weather. Nature geoscience, 7(9), 627-637. http://ic3.cat/wikicfu/img_auth.php/Cohen_et_al_NatGeo.pdf Francis, J. A., & Vavrus, S. J. (2012). Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid‐latitudes. Geophysical Research Letters, 39(6). http://marine.rutgers.edu/~francis/pres/Francis_Vavrus_2012GL051000_pub.pdf Jeffries, M. O., Richter-Menge, J., and Overland, J. E. (2014). Arctic Report Card 2014, http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard. NASA GISS (2015). NASA, NOAA Find 2014 Warmest Year in Modern Record. Research News: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20150116/ Screen, J. A., & Simmonds, I. (2013). Exploring links between Arctic amplification and mid‐latitude weather. Geophysical Research Letters, 40(5), 959-964. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50174/full
UQx DENIAL101x 6.2.2.1 Worldview backfire effect
 
09:40
John Cook explains the wordview backfire effect using examples from recent history and research. He also talks about ways in which we might combat this phenomenon when it comes to discussions of climate change. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Batson, C. D. (1975). Rational processing or rationalization - effect of disconfirming information on a stated religious belief. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 176-184. Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and its correction continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106-131. http://psi.sagepub.com/content/13/3/106.abstract Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., Richey, S., & Freed, G. L. (2014). Effective messages in vaccine promotion: a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 133(4), e835-e842. http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/3830/Pediatrics-2014-Nyhan-e835-42.pdf Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303-330. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 Hart, P. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2011). Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research, 0093650211416646. https://experts.umich.edu/en/publications/boomerang-effects-in-science-communication-how-motivated-reasonin Jern, A., Chang, K. M. K., & Kemp, C. (2014). Belief polarization is not always irrational. Psychological review, 121(2), 206. http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1938&context=psychology&sei- Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). The rise of global warming skepticism: Exploring affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Analysis, 32(6), 1021-1032. http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Smith%20and%20Leiserowitz_Rise%20of%20GW%20Skepticism.pdf Hardisty, D. J., Johnson, E. J., & Weber, E. U. (2010). A dirty word or a dirty world? Attribute framing, political affiliation, and query theory. Psychological Science, 21(1), 86-92. http://davidhardisty.info/downloads/2009-ADirtyWordOrADirtyWorld-HardistyJohnsonWeber.pdf Bain, P. G., Hornsey, M. J., Bongiorno, R., & Jeffries, C. (2012). Promoting pro-environmental action in climate change deniers. Nature Climate Change, 2(8), 600-603. http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Bain_Promoting%20pro-environmental%20action.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 1.3.3.1 Psychological Barriers to Concern about Climate Change
 
07:00
Why is it difficult for people to care about and act on climate change? We call these psychological barriers "dragons of inaction." About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Gifford, R. (2011). The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66(4), 290. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/66/4/290/ Gifford, R., Scannell, L., Kormos, C., Smolova, L., Biel, A., Boncu, S., ... & Uzzell, D. (2009). Temporal pessimism and spatial optimism in environmental assessments: An 18-nation study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 1-12. http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/29735/2/Gifford_Scannell_Uzzell.pdf Pahl, S., Harris, P. R., Todd, H. A., & Rutter, D. R. (2005). Comparative optimism for environmental risks. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(1), 1-11. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494405000022 Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 32(4): 665-683. Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2007). Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global Environmental Change, 17(3), 445-459. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378007000209 Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2002). Extending the theory of planned behavior: Predicting the use of public transportation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(10), 2154-2189. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.334.650&rep=rep1&type=pdf Ding, D., Maibach, E. W., Zhao, X., Roser-Renouf, C., & Leiserowitz, A. (2011). Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement. Nature Climate Change, 1(9), 462-466. http://www.geog.psu.edu/sites/default/files/Ding_%282011%29_Perceptions_of_Scientific_Consensus.pdf McCright, A. M., Dunlap, R. E., & Xiao, C. (2013). Perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA. Climatic Change, 119(2), 511-518. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-013-0704-9 Lewandowsky, S., Gignac, G. E., & Vaughan, S. (2013). The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science. Nature Climate Change, 3(4), 399-404. http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n4/full/nclimate1720.html van der Linden, S. L., Leiserowitz, A. A., Feinberg, G. D., & Maibach, E. W. (2014). How to communicate the scientific consensus on climate change: Plain facts, pie charts or metaphors?. Climatic Change, 126(1-2), 255-262. http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/slinden/files/consensus1.pdf Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2006). Free-market ideology and environmental degradation the case of belief in global climate change. Environment and Behavior, 38(1), 48-71. http://eab.sagepub.com/content/38/1/48.short
UQx DENIAL101x The Climate of Middle Earth - Part 3
 
07:32
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.3.1.1 Vested Interests
 
05:32
Professor Scott Mandia talks about the role corporations have played in funding misinformation and confusing the public about the reality of climate change. ExxonMobil has waged the most successful and sophisticated science denial campaign since Big Tobacco's campaign against the dangers of smoking. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Cook, J., Nuccitelli, D., Green, S. A., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., ... & Skuce, A. (2013). Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environmental Research Letters, 8(2), 024024. http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.4.1.1 Manufacturing Doubt
 
05:53
Dr John Cook explains some of the most common methods used to manufacture public doubt about climate science. He begins by going back to campaigns denying links between tobacco and cancer, and seeing how their techniques have spread to other science denial campaigns. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Brysse, K., Oreskes, N., O’Reilly, J., & Oppenheimer, M. (2013). Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama?. Global Environmental Change, 23(1), 327-337. http://www.agrogen.org/upload_mm/2/0/b/f2601035-3fa4-41cb-b0f5-77de713695fc_erring.pdf Luntz F (2002) The environment: A cleaner, safer, healthier America. Luntz Research, Alexandria. https://www2.bc.edu/~plater/Newpublicsite06/suppmats/02.6.pdf Elsasser, S. W., & Dunlap, R. E. (2012). Leading voices in the denier choir: Conservative columnists’ dismissal of global warming and denigration of climate science. American Behavioral Scientist, 0002764212469800. http://abs.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/12/25/0002764212469800.abstract Freudenburg, W. R., & Muselli, V. (2010). Global warming estimates, media expectations, and the asymmetry of scientific challenge. Global Environmental Change, 20(3), 483-491. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.259.5411&rep=rep1&type=pdf Lester, G., Wilson, B., Griffin, L., & Mullen, P. E. (2004). Unusually persistent complainants. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 184(4), 352-356. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/184/4/352.full Lewandowsky, S., Mann, M. E., Bauld, L., Hastings, G., & Loftus, E. F. The Subterranean War on Science. aps Observer available online at https://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2013/november-13/the-subterranean-war-on-science.html Lewandowsky, S., Oreskes, N., Risbey, J. S., Newell, B. R., & Smithson, M. (2013). Toxic seepage: Climate denial and its corrosive effect on the scientific community. Mullen, P. E., & Lester, G. (2006). Vexatious litigants and unusually persistent complainants and petitioners: From querulous paranoia to querulous behaviour. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24(3), 333-349. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsl.671/abstract Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
UQx DENIAL101x From the Experts: Attack on Science
 
07:50
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 5.8.3.1 Full interview with Richard Alley
 
23:10
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.4.4.1 Structure of an effective debunking
 
03:24
John Cook introduces the "Fact-Myth-Fallacy" structure for debunking misinformation. Step 1) Introduce the factual information in a memorable or "sticky" fashion. 2) Explain why a common myth is incorrect. 3) Explain the fallacy that is found in the misinformation to help people understand why it is wrong. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
What drives scientists? - Richard Alley's Golden Nugget
 
01:41
Prof Alley gets passionate about the motivation of scientists. Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Any research used to develop this content has been cited on a references page within the subsection for this lecture. To register and learn more: http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial
UQx DENIAL101x Full interview with William Ruddiman
 
11:54
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 4.4.4.1 Climate science in the 1970s
 
05:57
What were climate scientists thinking and publishing in the 1970s, before there was empirical evidence that the globe was warming? Daniel Bedford explains. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. Reference: Peterson, T. C., Connolley, W. M., & Fleck, J. (2008). The myth of the 1970s global cooling scientific consensus. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89(9), 1325-1337. Link to PDF: http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/11584/1/2008bams2370%252E1.pdf Additional reading: Link to the Newsweek magazine article from 1975 mentioned in Daniel Bedford's lecture http://www.scribd.com/doc/225798861/Newsweek-s-Global-Cooling-Article-From-April-28-1975 Article by David Kirtley, a Denial101x discussion board moderator, about the fake Time magazine cover from June 2013 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/06/04/the-1970s-ice-age-myth-and-time-magazine-covers-by-david-kirtley/ The author of the 1975 Newsweek article argues that his article doesn't meant climate scientists are wrong now http://www.insidescience.org/content/my-1975-cooling-world-story-doesnt-make-todays-climate-scientists-wrong/1640
UQx DENIAL101x 2.4.1.1v2 Building a robust temperature record
 
06:14
In this lecture, Kevin Cowtan explains global temperature is measured how we know the thermometer record is accurate enough to detect human-caused warming. Subtitles available in ENGLISH and SLOVENIAN. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Morice, C. P., Kennedy, J. J., Rayner, N. A., & Jones, P. D. (2012). Quantifying uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of observational estimates: The HadCRUT4 data set. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 117(D8). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2011JD017187/full Rohde, R., Muller, R., Jacobsen, R., Perlmutter, S., Rosenfeld, A., Wurtele, J., ... & Mosher, S. (2013). Berkeley earth temperature averaging process. Geoinfor. Geostat.: An Overview, 1(2), 1-13. http://www.informath.org/apprise/a5700/b1102.pdf Cowtan, K., & Way, R. G. (2014). Coverage bias in the HadCRUT4 temperature series and its impact on recent temperature trends. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 140(683), 1935-1944. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.2297/full Smith, T. M., Reynolds, R. W., Peterson, T. C., & Lawrimore, J. (2008). Improvements to NOAA's historical merged land-ocean surface temperature analysis (1880-2006). Journal of Climate, 21(10), 2283-2296. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/docs/smith-et-al-2008.pdf Hansen, J., Ruedy, R., Sato, M., & Lo, K. (2010). Global surface temperature change. Reviews of Geophysics, 48(4). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010RG000345/full Compo, G. P., Whitaker, J. S., Sardeshmukh, P. D., Matsui, N., Allan, R. J., Yin, X., ... & Worley, S. J. (2011). The twentieth century reanalysis project. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 137(654), 1-28. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.776/full Mears, C. A., & Wentz, F. J. (2009). Construction of the Remote Sensing Systems V3. 2 atmospheric temperature records from the MSU and AMSU microwave sounders. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 26(6), 1040-1056. Link to PDF Spencer, R. W., Christy, J. R., Braswell, W. D., & Norris, W. B. (2006). Estimation of tropospheric temperature trends from MSU channels 2 and 4. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 23(3), 417-423. ftp://ftp.discoverearth.org/msu/support/mears_and_wentz_jaot_2009_tmt_tts_tls.pdf Anderson, D. M., Mauk, E. M., Wahl, E. R., Morrill, C., Wagner, A. J., Easterling, D., & Rutishauser, T. (2013). Global warming in an independent record of the past 130 years. Geophysical Research Letters, 40(1), 189-193. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL054271/full Ahmed, M., Anchukaitis, K., Buckley, B. M., Braida, M., Borgaonkar, H. P., Asrat, A., ... & Phipps, S. J. (2013). Continental-Scale Temperature Variability during the Past Two Millennia: Supplementary Information. Nature Geoscience, 6(5). http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/download/fedora_content/download/ac:162062/CONTENT/PAGES_2k_NGEO_Supplement.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 1.2.3.1 Consensus of Papers
 
06:51
What does peer-reviewed literature have to say about climate change? The seminal work of Naomi Oreskes in 2004 analysed peer-reviewed scientific papers and found unanimous scientific agreement. Follow-up research by the Skeptical Science team quantified the consensus in the scientific literature from 1991 to 2011, finding a 97% agreement. Subtitles available in English, Slovenian, Finnish About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Oreskes, N. (2004). The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 306(5702), 1686-1686. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full Cook, J., Nuccitelli, D., Green, S. A., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., ... & Skuce, A. (2013). Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environmental Research Letters, 8(2), 024024. http://www.skepticalscience.com/tcp.php Shwed, U., & Bearman, P. S. (2010). The temporal structure of scientific consensus formation. American Sociological Review, 75(6), 817-840. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163460/
UQx DENIAL101x 6.3.1.1 Inoculation Theory
 
05:56
John Cook outlines how to stop science denial: by exposing people to weak forms of science denial. This is the findings of inoculation theory, a branch of psychological research that applies the metaphor of inoculation to knowledge. Subtitles available in ENGLISH and SLOVENIAN. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., Richey, S., & Freed, G. L. (2014). Effective messages in vaccine promotion: a randomized trial. Pediatrics, 133(4), e835-e842. http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/3830/Pediatrics-2014-Nyhan-e835-42.pdf Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303-330. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 Hart, P. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2011). Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research, 0093650211416646. http://climateshiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/HartNisbet2011_BoomerangeEffectsClimate_CommunicationResearch.pdf (reference specifically about inoculation and climate science) Leviston, Z., Walker, I., & Morwinski, S. (2013). Your opinion on climate change might not be as common as you think. Nature Climate Change, 3(4), 334-337. http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n4/full/nclimate1743.html (demonstrating that misinformation matters) Malka, A., Krosnick, J. A., Debell, M., Pasek, J., & Schneider, D. (2009). Featuring skeptics in news media stories about global warming reduces public beliefs in the seriousness of global warming. Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Technical Paper https://woods.stanford.edu/news-events/news/featuring-skeptics-news-media-stories-reduces-public-beliefs-seriousness-global Clark, D., Ranney, M. A., & Felipe, J. (2013). Knowledge helps: Mechanistic information and numeric evidence as cognitive levers to overcome stasis and build public consensus on climate change. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2070-2075). http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/Proceedings/2013/papers/0381/paper0381.pdf (Over 50 years ago) McGuire, W. J., & Papageorgis, D. (1961). The relative efficacy of various types of prior belief-defense in producing immunity against persuasion. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(2), 327. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/abn/62/2/327/ Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 951-970. http://www.elainegalvin.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Refutation-text-in-Science-Education.pdf (A study done with 1st year psychology students) Kowalski, P., & Taylor, A. K. (2009). The effect of refuting misconceptions in the introductory psychology class. Teaching of Psychology, 36(3), 153-159. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00986280902959986#.VSKm9JM9rEZ (Study of physics students) Muller, D. A., Bewes, J., Sharma, M. D., & Reimann, P. (2008). Saying the wrong thing: Improving learning with multimedia by including misconceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 144-155. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00248.x/abstract
UQx DENIAL101x 0.1.1.1 Introduction to Denial (self-paced)
 
09:36
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 4.4.3.1 Weather vs climate
 
06:24
Keah Schuenemann explains the differences between weather models and climate models. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Flato, G., J. Marotzke, B. Abiodun, P. Braconnot, S.C. Chou, W. Collins, P. Cox, F. Driouech, S. Emori, V. Eyring, C. Forest, P. Gleckler, E. Guilyardi, C. Jakob, V. Kattsov, C. Reason and M. Rummukainen, 2013: Evaluation of Climate Models. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf Novak, D. R., Bailey, C., Brill, K. F., Burke, P., Hogsett, W. A., Rausch, R., & Schichtel, M. (2014). Precipitation and temperature forecast performance at the Weather Prediction Center. Weather and Forecasting, 29(3), 489-504. http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/WAF-D-14-00007.1
UQx DENIAL101x 1.4.2.1 Media Balance as Bias
 
07:08
The media plays a crucial role in communicating climate science to the public, but the journalistic norm of balance, in the case of climate change, can misinform the public about the science. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Malka, A., Krosnick, J. A., Debell, M., Pasek, J., & Schneider, D. (2009). Featuring skeptics in news media stories about global warming reduces public beliefs in the seriousness of global warming. Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Technical Paper). https://woods.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/files/Global-Warming-Skeptics-Technical-Detail.pdf Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125-136. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378003000669 Boykoff, M. T. (2007). Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006. Area, 39(4), 470-481. http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/2007.39.pdf Boykoff, M. T., & Mansfield, M. (2008). 'Ye Olde Hot Aire': Reporting on human contributions to climate change in the UK tabloid press. Environmental Research Letters, 3(2), 024002. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/3/2/024002;jsessionid=2FC81E61703FEB48A9C0EA685F248E4C.c2.iopscience.cld.iop.org Boykoff, M. T. (2008). Lost in translation? United States television news coverage of anthropogenic climate change, 1995–2004. Climatic Change, 86(1-2), 1-11. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-007-9299-3
UQx DENIAL101x 1.3.5.2 From the experts: Skepticism vs Denial
 
06:58
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x The Climate of Middle Earth - Part 1
 
08:08
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.3.2.1 Ideological Bias
 
06:33
Scott Mandia describes how ideology and world views influence our beliefs about climate change. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). The second national risk and culture study: Making sense of-and making progress in-the American culture war of fact. GWU Legal Studies Research Paper, (370), 08-26. http://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1271&context=faculty_publications&sei-redir=1 Campbell, T. H., & Kay, A. C. (2014). Solution aversion: On the relation between ideology and motivated disbelief. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(5), 809. http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/9256/Campbell%20et%20al._Solution%20Aversion.pdf Leiserowitz et al. (2013). Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs. Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication. http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/files/Climate-Beliefs-April-2013.pdf . Accessed online 05 April 2015 What we know: The reality, risks, and response to climate change. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). http://whatweknow.aaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/whatweknow_website.pdf Accessed online 05 April 2015
UQx DENIAL101x 5.2.4.1 Methane clathrate feedback
 
07:19
Andy Skuce discusses a myth that exaggerates the potential risk from methane clathrate feedback. Methane is a greenhouse gas with a warming potential 25 times greater than CO2. This video addresses concerns about massive methane release from clathrates. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Ruppel, C. D. (2011). Methane hydrates and contemporary climate change. Nature Education Knowledge, 3(10), 29. http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/methanehydrates-and-contemporary-climate-change-24314790 Whiteman, G., Hope, C., & Wadhams, P. (2013). Climate science: Vast costs of Arctic change. Nature, 499(7459), 401-403. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v499/n7459/full/499401a.html Shakhova, N., Semiletov, I., Leifer, I., Sergienko, V., Salyuk, A., Kosmach, D., ... & Gustafsson, Ö. (2014). Ebullition and storm-induced methane release from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. Nature Geoscience, 7(1), 64-70. http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n1/abs/ngeo2007.html MacDougall, A. H., Avis, C. A., & Weaver, A. J. (2012). Significant contribution to climate warming from the permafrost carbon feedback. Nature Geoscience, 5(10), 719-721. http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n10/full/ngeo1573.html Dmitrenko, I. A., Kirillov, S. A., Tremblay, L. B., Kassens, H., Anisimov, O. A., Lavrov, S. A., ... & Grigoriev, M. N. (2011). Recent changes in shelf hydrography in the Siberian Arctic: Potential for subsea permafrost instability. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans (1978–2012), 116(C10). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2011JC007218/full Ciais, P., C. Sabine, G. Bala, L. Bopp, V. Brovkin, J. Canadell, A. Chhabra, R. DeFries, J. Galloway, M. Heimann, C. Jones, C. Le Quéré, R.B. Myneni, S. Piao and P. Thornton, 2013: Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. See pages 530-531 https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter06_FINAL.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 4.4.6.1 From the experts: Climate models
 
10:31
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.4.5.1 From the experts: Spread of denial
 
06:50
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 3.2.2.1 Human CO2 emissions trump volcanoes’
 
05:40
Andy Skuce examines how CO2 emissions from human activity compare to CO2 emissions from volcanoes and finds humans release much more. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. Extended commentary by Andy Skuce: The main reference used in this lecture for emissions estimates from volcanoes is the 2013 review paper Deep Carbon Emissions from Volcanoes by Michael Burton, Georgina Sawyer and Domenico Graniero published in the journal Reviews in Mineralogy & Geochemistry Vol. 75 pp. 323-354, 2013. http://www.minsocam.org/msa/rim/RiMG075/RiMG075_Ch11.pdf The figures I quoted in the talk are central estimate numbers quoted in Table 6 and there are considerable ranges of uncertainty associated with them. Table 7 shows how estimates of CO2 emissions form subaerial volcanoes have generally increased as research progresses over time. The lowest estimate (66 Mt/yr) was from Allard in 1992 and the highest (540 Mt/yr) –the one I used–was from the 2013 Burton paper. Table 5 in Burton et al. shows a very wide range of CO2 emission estimates from different studies of mid-ocean ridge volcanoes of 4 to 792 Mt/yr, reflecting the difficulty of making these estimates. Burton et al. use a central estimate of 97 Mt/yr, which is what I adopted. That figure came from a study by Marty and Tolstikhin (1998) of 97 ± 40 Mt/yr of CO2. I have also included sinks of CO2 that are associated with volcanic rocks. These amount to “ingassing” of approximately 180 Mt per year from weathering of volcanic rocks on land (Dessert et al., 2003) and 150 Mt/yr of CO2 from carbonation of volcanic rocks on the sea floor (Alt et al., 1999) In case there are objections that the reactions that absorb CO2 should not be counted in the currently active volcanic emissions balance sheet, I have used both the gross emissions of 640 Mt/yr and the net emissions of 310 Mt/yr for comparisons with human emissions. Note that the volcanic gross emissions include significant current outgassing from inactive volcanoes, so that taking account of the uptake from current “ingassing” of volcanic rocks is consistent. All of the data on human emissions and the historical CO2 concentration observations was downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. The data were subject to minor computation (e.g., conversion of carbon masses to CO2 masses and cumulative emissions calculations) and the observations of concentrations were corrected to an 1850 baseline. The cumulative emissions were multiplied by 40% to make a rough estimate of the atmospheric fraction (the remainder of the CO2 being taken up by oceans and the terrestrial biosphere). This is not an exact method, since the take up of a pulse of CO2 is a complex time-dependent function arising from several independent processes. The simple 40% factor used here is for illustrative purposes only. The estimates in Table 10 in Le Quéré et al. (2014) yield an average atmospheric fraction of 42% since 1870, with a range of 37-48%. Most of the uncertainty arises from the estimates of land use CO2 emissions and terrestrial CO2 sinks. There is more detail about these calculations and assumptions in a blogpost I wrote. https://critical-angle.net/2015/04/01/emissions-history-and-the-great-acceleration/ I performed a similar atmospheric concentration calculation assuming constant volcanic emissions of 310 and 640 Mt/yr. Human and volcanic emissions were then compared with observed atmospheric concentration changes since 1850, with the goal of showing how volcanic emissions are far too small to account for observations, whereas human emissions fit the observations closely, both in terms of magnitude and the shape of the atmospheric concentration curve. I have used the term “dormant” volcano in an informal sense to mean a volcano that is no longer active but that may or may not become active in the future. Burton et al. used the term “inactive volcano”. MYTH EXAMPLES In case anybody thinks that I am flogging a dead horse in this lecture, below is a 2014 report of Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski making the false claim and Mike Huebsch, an appointee of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker making a similar assertion in 2015. http://www.adn.com/alaska-beat/article/lisa-murkowski-and-volcano/2014/11/06/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/scott-walker-climate-change_n_7036766
UQx DENIAL101x 3.2.1.1 Upsetting the natural balance
 
05:52
Gavin Cawley explains the global carbon cycle and how human activity is causing an increase of CO2 in our atmosphere. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Gavin C. Cawley, On the atmospheric residence time of anthropogenically sourced carbon dioxide, Energy & Fuels, volume 25, number 11, pages 5503–5513, September 2011. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ef200914u (sets out the conservation of mass argument in more detail). Raupach, M. R., Canadell, J. G., & Quéré, C. L. (2008). Anthropogenic and biophysical contributions to increasing atmospheric CO 2 growth rate and airborne fraction. Biogeosciences, 5(6), 1601-1613. http://www.biogeosciences.net/5/1601/2008/bg-5-1601-2008.pdf (conservation of mass analysis shown in figure 1d) Houghton, J. T., Jenkins, G. J., Ephramus, J. J., Eds. Climate Change - The IPCC Scientific Assessment; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K., 1990 https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf Section 1.2, particularly subsection 1.2.5 “Evidence that the contemporary Carbon Dioxide Increase is Anthropogenic” on page 14 (page 62 of the pdf). Archer, D. The Global Carbon Cycle; Princeton Primers in Climate; Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-691-14414-6, 2010. Tyler Volk, “CO2 Rising - The Worlds Greatest Environmental Challenge”, MIT Press, ISBN 978-0-262-51521-4, 2008. Ballantyne, A. P., C. B. Alden, J. B. Miller, P. P. Tans, and J. W. C. White, 2012: Increase in observed net carbon dioxide uptake by land and oceans during the last 50 years. Nature, 488, 70–72. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v488/n7409/abs/nature11299.html Boden, T., G. Marland, and R. Andres, 2011: Global CO2 emissions from fossilfuel burning, cement manufacture, and gas flaring: 1751–2008 (accessed at 2011.11.10). Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U. S. Department of Energy, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge, TN, U.S.A., doi:10.3334/ CDIAC/00001_V2011. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview_2008.html Ciais, P., C. Sabine, G. Bala, L. Bopp, V. Brovkin, J. Canadell, A. Chhabra, R. DeFries, J. Galloway, M. Heimann, C. Jones, C. Le Quéré, R.B. Myneni, S. Piao and P. Thornton, 2013: Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter06_FINAL.pdf Le Quéré, C., et al., 2013: The global carbon budget 1959–2011. Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 5, 165–186. http://www.earth-syst-sci-data.net/5/165/2013/essd-5-165-2013.html Le Quéré, C., Moriarty, R., Andrew, R. M., Peters, G. P., Ciais, P., Friedlingstein, P., Jones, S. D., Sitch, S., Tans, P., Arneth, A., Boden, T. A., Bopp, L., Bozec, Y., Canadell, J. G., Chini, L. P., Chevallier, F., Cosca, C. E., Harris, I., Hoppema, M., Houghton, R. A., House, J. I., Jain, A. K., Johannessen, T., Kato, E., Keeling, R. F., Kitidis, V., Klein Goldewijk, K., Koven, C., Landa, C. S., Landschützer, P., Lenton, A., Lima, I. D., Marland, G., Mathis, J. T., Metzl, N., Nojiri, Y., Olsen, A., Ono, T., Peng, S., Peters, W., Pfeil, B., Poulter, B., Raupach, M. R., Regnier, P., Rödenbeck, C., Saito, S., Salisbury, J. E., Schuster, U., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Segschneider, J., Steinhoff, T., Stocker, B. D., Sutton, A. J., Takahashi, T., Tilbrook, B., van der Werf, G. R., Viovy, N., Wang, Y.-P., Wanninkhof, R., Wiltshire, A., and Zeng, N.: Global carbon budget 2014, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 7, 47-85, doi:10.5194/essd-7-47-2015, 2015. http://www.earth-syst-sci-data.net/7/47/2015/essd-7-47-2015.html
UQx DENIAL101x 6.2.1.1 Vocal minority
 
06:00
John Cook explains the vocal minority using research from The Six Americas report and from Levinston, Walker and Morwinski's article, "Your opinion on climate change might not be as common as you think," http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n4/full/nclimate1743.html which looks at public opinion about climate change in Australia. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Roser-Renouf, C., Stenhouse, N., Rolfe-Redding, J., Maibach, E. W., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014). Engaging Diverse Audiences with Climate Change: Message Strategies for Global Warming's Six Americas. Available at SSRN 2410650. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2410650 Leviston, Z., Walker, I., & Morwinski, S. (2013). Your opinion on climate change might not be as common as you think. Nature Climate Change, 3(4), 334-337. http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n4/full/nclimate1743.html Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press. Global environmental change, 14(2), 125-136. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378003000669 Boykoff, M. T. (2008). Lost in translation? United States television news coverage of anthropogenic climate change, 1995–2004. Climatic Change, 86(1-2), 1-11. http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Max_Boykoff2/publication/225514787_Lost_in_translation_United_States_television_news_coverage_of_anthropogenic_climate_change_19952004/links/02e7e528bf12a6ece1000000.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 3.3.1.1 The greenhouse effect
 
04:33
Mark Richardson takes us to the Reading University Atmospheric Observatory to explain how the greenhouse effect works. He concludes by busting the myth that the greenhouse effect violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Exploring the universe, NASA, http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/starsgalaxies/cobe_background.html, Accessed 15 April 2015. Mueller, N., Helbert, J., Hashimoto, G. L., Tsang, C. C. C., Erard, S., Piccioni, G., & Drossart, P. (2008). Venus surface thermal emission at 1 μm in VIRTIS imaging observations: Evidence for variation of crust and mantle differentiation conditions. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets (1991–2012), 113(E5). Bullock, M. A., & Grinspoon, D. H. (2001). The recent evolution of climate on Venus. Icarus, 150(1), 19-37. Svedhem, H., Titov, D. V., McCoy, D., Lebreton, J. P., Barabash, S., Bertaux, J. L., ... & Coradini, M. (2007). Venus Express—the first European mission to Venus. Planetary and Space Science, 55(12), 1636-1652. Stephens, G. L., Li, J., Wild, M., Clayson, C. A., Loeb, N., Kato, S., ... & Andrews, T. (2012). An update on Earth's energy balance in light of the latest global observations. Nature Geoscience, 5(10), 691-696. Trenberth, K. E., Fasullo, J. T., & Kiehl, J. (2009). Earth's global energy budget. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 90(3), 311-323. Fixsen, D. J. (2009). The temperature of the cosmic microwave background. The Astrophysical Journal, 707(2), 916. Tyndall, J. (1885). Heat: a mode of motion. D. Appleton.
UQx DENIAL101x 3.4.1.1 Structure of the atmosphere
 
04:51
Mark Richardson examines one of the human fingerprints being observed in the structure of the atmosphere and debunks a myth about the elusive tropospheric hot spot. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Schneider, S. H. (1975). On the carbon dioxide-climate confusion. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 32(11), 2060-2066. Manabe, S., & Wetherald, R. T. (1975). The effects of doubling the CO2 concentration on the climate of a general circulation model. Manabe, S., & Möller, F. (1961). On the radiative equilibrium and heat balance of the atmosphere. Monthly Weather Review. Randel, W. J., Shine, K. P., Austin, J., Barnett, J., Claud, C., Gillett, N. P., ... & Yoden, S. (2009). An update of observed stratospheric temperature trends. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres (1984–2012), 114(D2). IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007, IPCC AR4 WG1 (2007): http://ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch8s8-6-3-1.html Emmert, J. T., Picone, J. M., & Meier, R. R. (2008). Thermospheric global average density trends, 1967–2007, derived from orbits of 5000 near‐Earth objects. Geophysical Research Letters, 35(5). Akmaev, R. A., Fomichev, V. I., & Zhu, X. (2006). Impact of middle-atmospheric composition changes on greenhouse cooling in the upper atmosphere. Journal of atmospheric and solar-terrestrial physics, 68(17), 1879-1889. Emmert, J. T., Picone, J. M., Lean, J. L., & Knowles, S. H. (2004). Global change in the thermosphere: Compelling evidence of a secular decrease in density. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics (1978–2012), 109(A2).
UQx DENIAL101x 5.3.5.1 From the experts: Ecological impacts
 
07:41
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.2.6.1 From the experts: Scientific consensus
 
06:31
Commentary from Dr Ben Santer, Professor Naomi Oreskes and Professor Peter Doran on the topic of scientific consensus and climate change. Subtitles available in English, Finnish About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
Full interview with David Sassoon from Inside Climate News
 
05:41
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Any research used to develop this content has been cited on a references page within the subsection for this lecture. To register and learn more: http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial
UQx DENIAL101x 5.2.1.1 Climate is Sensitive
 
05:43
Dana Nuccitelli examines climate sensitivity i.e. the amount of global warming expected from a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: PALAEOSENS Project Members. (2012). Making sense of palaeoclimate sensitivity. Nature, 491(7426), 683-691. http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/download/fedora_content/download/ac:162782/CONTENT/Paleosens_Project_Members_2012.pdf Masson-Delmotte, V., M. Schulz, A. Abe-Ouchi, J. Beer, A. Ganopolski, J.F. González Rouco, E. Jansen, K. Lambeck, J. Luterbacher, T. Naish, T. Osborn, B. Otto-Bliesner, T. Quinn, R. Ramesh, M. Rojas, X. Shao and A. Timmermann, 2013: Information from Paleoclimate Archives. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter05_FINAL.pdf Flato, G., J. Marotzke, B. Abiodun, P. Braconnot, S.C. Chou, W. Collins, P. Cox, F. Driouech, S. Emori, V. Eyring, C. Forest, P. Gleckler, E. Guilyardi, C. Jakob, V. Kattsov, C. Reason and M. Rummukainen, 2013: Evaluation of Climate Models. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA http://ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 1.2.2.1 Consensus of Scientists
 
06:58
The overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree that humans are causing climate change. How do we know that? This video covers several studies showing the high levels of agreement about anthropogenic global warming among scientists, and concludes by debunking the infamous "Global Warming Petition Project." Subtitles available in English, Slovenian, Finnish About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Doran, P. T., & Zimmerman, M. K. (2009). Examining the scientific consensus on climate change. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 90(3), 22-23. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009EO030002/pdf Anderegg, W. R., Prall, J. W., Harold, J., & Schneider, S. H. (2010). Expert credibility in climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(27), 12107-12109. http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full.pdf Diethelm, P., & McKee, M. (2009). Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?. The European Journal of Public Health, 19(1), 2-4. http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/eurpub/19/1/2.full.pdf Kahan, D. M., Jenkins‐Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2011). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14(2), 147-174. http://climateinterpreter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Kahan,%20Jenkins-Smith%20and%20Braman%202010%20-%20Cultural%20cognition%20of%20scientific%20consensus.pdf Plous, S. (1991). Biases in the assimilation of technological breakdowns - do accidents make us safer. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(13), 1058-1082. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00459.x/abstract Talisse, R., & Aikin, S. F. (2006). Two forms of the straw man. Argumentation, 20(3), 345-352. http://www.communicationcache.com/uploads/1/0/8/8/10887248/two_forms_of_the_straw_man.pdf Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). The rise of global warming skepticism: Exploring affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Analysis, 32(6), 1021-1032. http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/Smith%20and%20Leiserowitz_Rise%20of%20GW%20Skepticism.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x Full interview with Kevin Trenberth
 
24:36
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 6.3.7.1 From the experts: Climate metaphors
 
06:53
This series of expert interviews provides a number of different climate and climate science metaphors gathered from interviews with Professor Steven Sherwood, Professor Jeremy Kerr, Professor Richard Alley, Professor Luke Copland, Matthew England, Dr Jon Bridle, Professor Lonnie Thompson, Professor Dan Lunt, Professor Isabella Velicogna, Professor Katrin Meissner, Professor Andrew Pitman, Professor Mauri Pelto, Professor Fabrice Calmels and Professor Katharine Hayhoe. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx Denial101x Interview with Peter Ellerton
 
15:35
Peter Ellerton, University of Queensland Director of the Critical Thinking Project, introduces us to critical thinking in argumentation. He explains what it means for an argument to be "valid" or "sound," how values can form an essential part of a logical argument, and describes some logical fallacies as they apply to deductive and inductive reasoning. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 1.7.4.1 Scientific method
 
06:02
Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a MOOC from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a climate MOOC; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum.
UQx DENIAL101x 5.2.3.1 The role of clouds in climate change
 
05:52
Peter Jacobs talks about one of the more complicated questions in climate science: how will clouds change in a changing climate? This is especially interesting as different types of clouds can have either a cooling or a warming effect, depending on whether they're more effective at reflecting sunlight or trapping heat from the Earth's surface. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. Reference: Boucher, O., D. Randall, P. Artaxo, C. Bretherton, G. Feingold, P. Forster, V.-M. Kerminen, Y. Kondo, H. Liao, U. Lohmann, P. Rasch, S.K. Satheesh, S. Sherwood, B. Stevens and X.Y. Zhang, 2013: Clouds and Aerosols. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter07_FINAL.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 3.2.3.1 Taking up residence
 
05:16
Gavin Cawley explains the carbon cycle, how human activity is causing an increase of CO2 in our atmosphere, and uses bank accounts to show how we can know humans are increasing atmospheric CO2 even if we don't know every natural carbon source and sink. Subtitles available in ENGLISH and SLOVENIAN. About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Gavin C. Cawley, On the atmospheric residence time of anthropogenically sourced carbon dioxide, Energy & Fuels, volume 25, number 11, pages 5503–5513, September 2011. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ef200914u Houghton, J. T., Jenkins, G. J., Ephramus, J. J., Eds. Climate Change - The IPCC Scientific Assessment; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K., 1990 https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf Section 1.2, particularly subsection 1.2.1 “The Cycle of Carbon in Nature” on page 14 (page 56 of the pdf), which explicitly cautions against confusing the residence (turnover) time with the adjustment time. Craig, H. (2011). The Natural Distribution of Radiocarbon and the Exchange Time of Carbon Dioxide Between Atmosphere and Sea. Tellus A, 9(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v9i1.9078 Archer, D. and V. Brovkin, 2008: The millennial atmospheric lifetime of anthropogenic CO2. Clim. Change, 90, 283–297. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-008-9413-1 Eby, M., K. Zickfeld, A. Montenegro, D. Archer, K. J. Meissner, and A. J. Weaver, 2009: Lifetime of anthropogenic climate change: Millennial time scales of potential CO2 and surface temperature perturbations. J. Clim., 22, 2501–2511. https://geosci.uchicago.edu/~archer/reprints/eby.2009.long_tail.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 2.4.4.1 Climate change vs global warming
 
06:33
"Climate change" and "global warming" are phrases that are often used interchangeably, but they do mean different things. Peter Jacobs explains the history of the two phrases. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video (partial list): Somerville, R. C., & Hassol, S. J. (2011). the science of climate change. Phys. Today, 64(10), 48. http://verderiverinstitute.org/communicatingclimatechange.pdf Coulson, S., Hodkinson, I. D., Strathdee, A., Bale, J. S., Block, W., Worland, M. R., & Webb, N. R. (1993). Simulated climate change: the interaction between vegetation type and microhabitat temperatures at Ny Ålesund, Svalbard. Polar Biology, 13(1), 67-70. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00236585 Wigley, T. M. L., & Jones, P. D. (1985). Influences of precipitation changes and direct CO2 effects on streamflow. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v314/n6007/abs/314149a0.html Elsner, J. B., Kossin, J. P., & Jagger, T. H. (2008). The increasing intensity of the strongest tropical cyclones. Nature, 455(7209), 92-95. http://environmentportal.in/files/Increasing.pdf Touchan, R., Anchukaitis, K. J., Meko, D. M., Sabir, M., Attalah, S., & Aloui, A. (2011). Spatiotemporal drought variability in northwestern Africa over the last nine centuries. Climate Dynamics, 37(1-2), 237-252. http://siberianschool2013.kgtei.ru/readings/Touchan%20et%20al_paper2011_CD.pdf Shaw, J. M. (2003). Climate change and deforestation: Implications for the Maya collapse. Ancient Mesoamerica, 14(01), 157-167. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=151951&fileId=S0956536103132063 Svensen, H., Planke, S., Chevallier, L., Malthe-Sørenssen, A., Corfu, F., & Jamtveit, B. (2007). Hydrothermal venting of greenhouse gases triggering Early Jurassic global warming. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 256(3), 554-566. http://folk.uio.no/hensven/Svensen_etal_EPSL_07.pdf Dera, G., Brigaud, B., Monna, F., Laffont, R., Pucéat, E., Deconinck, J. F., ... & Durlet, C. (2011). Climatic ups and downs in a disturbed Jurassic world. Geology, 39(3), 215-218. http://www.fabricemonna.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/2011geol.pdf Daszak, P., Cunningham, A. A., & Hyatt, A. D. (2001). Anthropogenic environmental change and the emergence of infectious diseases in wildlife. Acta tropica, 78(2), 103-116. http://irceb.asu.edu/amphibians/pdf/actatrop.pdf Travis, J. M. J. (2003). Climate change and habitat destruction: a deadly anthropogenic cocktail. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 270(1514), 467-473. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1691268/pdf/12641900.pdf McCauley, D. J., Pinsky, M. L., Palumbi, S. R., Estes, J. A., Joyce, F. H., & Warner, R. R. (2015). Marine defaunation: Animal loss in the global ocean. Science, 347(6219), 1255641. http://www.sciencepubs.org/content/347/6219/1255641.abstract Meehl, G. A., Zwiers, F., Evans, J., Knutson, T., Mearns, L., & Whetton, P. (2000). Trends in extreme weather and climate events: Issues related to modeling extremes in projections of future climate change*. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 81(3), 427-436. http://www.agci.org/dB/PDFs/05S2_GMeehl_BAMS3.pdf Mitchell, J. M. (1961). Recent secular changes of global temperature. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 95(1), 235-250. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1961.tb50036.x/abstract United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) Article 2 of the Convention. http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/background/items/1353.php. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) http://ipcc.ch/organization/organization.shtml Lyman, J. M., & Johnson, G. C. (2014). Estimating global ocean heat content changes in the upper 1800 m since 1950 and the influence of climatology choice*. Journal of Climate, 27(5), 1945-1957. http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/people/gjohnson/gcj_4n.pdf Marzeion, B., Cogley, J. G., Richter, K., & Parkes, D. (2014). Attribution of global glacier mass loss to anthropogenic and natural causes. Science, 345(6199), 919-921. http://sciencepubs.org/content/345/6199/919.abstract Easterling, D. R., & Wehner, M. F. (2009). Is the climate warming or cooling?. Geophysical Research Letters, 36(8).http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL037810/full
UQx DENIAL101x 5.3.2.1 Polar bears
 
05:14
Dana Nuccitelli explains how global warming affects polar bears through its effect on melting sea ice. Different types of sea ice melting mean different impacts. About Denial101x... Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Summary of polar bear population status per 2014 (2015). IUCN/SSC PBSG. http://pbsg.npolar.no/en/status/status-table.html. Accessed online 06 April 2015 Bromaghin, J.F, McDonald, T. L., Stirling, I., Derocher, A.E., Richardson, E.S., Regehr, E.V., Douglas, D.C., Durner, G.M., Atwood, T. & Amstrup, S.C. In press. "Polar bear population dynamics in the southern Beaufort Sea during a period of sea ice decline." Ecological Applications. Polar Bears International. (2015). “Polar Bears and Sea Ice Regions.” http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/where-do-polar-bears-live/polar-bears-sea-ice-regions Regehr, E.V., Lunn, N.J., Amstrup, S.C. & Stirling, I. (2007). "Effects of earlier sea ice breakup on survival and population size of polar bears in western Hudson Bay." Journal of Wildlife Management 71(8): 2673–2683. http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/sites/default/files/regehr_et_al._2007_jwm.pdf
UQx DENIAL101x 6.3.2.1 Sticky Science
 
08:01
Learn about one of the best methods for making your science sticky - the SUCCES method developed by brothers Chip and Dan Heath. We use this method to respond to climate change myths. Subtitles available: ENGLISH, SLOVENŠČINA (Slovenian) About Denial101x: Climate change is real, so why the controversy and debate? Learn to make sense of the science and to respond to climate change denial in Denial101x, a massive open online course (MOOC) from UQx and edX. Denial101x isn’t just a MOOC about climate change; it’s a MOOC about how people think about climate change. Comments on our channel are turned off. To discuss our videos, enrol at http://edx.org/understanding-climate-denial and join us in the edX discussion forum. References for this video: Schwarz, N., Sanna, L. J., Skurnik, I., & Yoon, C. (2007). Metacognitive experiences and the intricacies of setting people straight: Implications for debiasing and public information campaigns. Advances in experimental social psychology, 39, 127-161. http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic446361.files/04_14_09_Schwarz.pdf Skurnik, I., Yoon, C., Park, D. C., & Schwarz, N. (2005). How warnings about false claims become recommendations. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 713-724. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.1086/426605?sid=21105900812241&uid=4&uid=2&uid=3737864 Seifert, C. M. (2002). The continued influence of misinformation in memory: What makes a correction effective?. Psychology of learning and motivation, 41, 265-292. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079742102800093 Nyhan, B. & Reifler, J. (2013b). Which corrections work? Research results and practice recommendations. http://www.dartmouth.edu/~nyhan/nyhan-reifler-report-naf-corrections.pdf Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2007). Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. Random House.