Skip to content

In case after case, Fred Singer, Fred Seitz, and a handful…

“In case after case, Fred Singer, Fred Seitz, and a handful of other scientists joined forces with think tanks and private corporations to challenge scientific evidence on a host of contemporary issues. In the early years, much of the money for this effort came from the tobacco industry; in later…” quote by Naomi Oreskes
Download Open image
““In case after case, Fred Singer, Fred Seitz, and a handful of other scientists joined forces with think tanks and private corporations to challenge scientific evidence on a host of contemporary issues. In the early years, much of the money for this effort came from the tobacco industry; in later years, it came from foundations, think tanks, and the fossil fuel industry. They claimed the link between smoking and cancer remained unproven. They insisted that scientists were mistaken about the risks and limitations of SDI. They argued that acid rain was caused by volcanoes, and so was the ozone hole. They charged that the Environmental Protection Agency had rigged the science surrounding secondhand smoke. Most recently—over the course of nearly two decades and against the face of mounting evidence—they dismissed the reality of global warming. First they claimed there was none, then they claimed it was just natural variation, and then they claimed that even if it was happening and it was our fault, it didn’t matter because we could just adapt to it. In case after case, they steadfastly denied the existence of scientific agreement, even though they, themselves, were pretty much the only ones who disagreed.””

Naomi Oreskes

About This Quote

This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.

Scientists and industry allies have repeatedly undermined scientific consensus for profit, creating public doubt on issues like smoking, acid rain, and climate change.

In simple terms: Industry manipulates science to sow doubt for profit.

Key Takeaway

Critically evaluate sources and demand transparency.

Themes

science denial industry influence public policy misinformation environmental risk

Mood

cautious determined

Type

explanatory advocacy

When to use this quote

  • policy advocacy
  • journalistic investigation
  • public education
  • corporate accountability
  • legal action

Key Concepts

ethics political economy media literacy

Questions to Reflect On

  • What mechanisms can protect science from corporate interference?
  • How can citizens discern genuine scientific consensus?
A Different Perspective

Counterpoint: Some argue that scientific debate is essential, but manufactured doubt exceeds healthy skepticism.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ No ratings yet

More by Naomi Oreskes

Explore all 39 Naomi Oreskes quotes

More Acid rain quotes

Browse all 43 Acid rain quotes