“While the idea of equal time for opposing opinions makes sense in a two-party political system, it does not work for science, because science is not about opinion. It is about evidence. It is about claims that can be, and… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
“If you believed in capitalism, you had to attack science, because science had revealed the hazards that capitalism had brought in its wake. The… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
“By the early 2000s, dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system was under way. Fires, floods, hurricanes, and heat waves began to intensify. Still,… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
“The writer C. S. Lewis once characterized this style of argument: “The very lack of evidence is thus treated as evidence; the absence of… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
Why would scientists dedicated to uncovering the truth about the natural world deliberately misrepresent the work of their own colleagues? Why would they spread… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
“Robert Jastrow and William Nierenberg, wrote a report questioning the evidence of global warming.15 They were soon invited to the White House to brief… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
It really is a very radical call ... to reject materialism as our central value and to think about the sanctity of life and… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
“Congress was also looking into climate change. The 1978 National Climate Act had established a national climate research program,” — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
I think Pope Francis is our Pope Francis. I mean, the point of him is that he's a global leader, and he's trying, I… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
At a recent conference, a colleague told one of us that in IPCC discussions, some scientists have been reluctant to make strong claims about… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
“While the idea of equal time for opposing opinions makes sense in a two-party political system, it does not work for science, because science… — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
Yet again, unscientific claims were being circulated broadly, but the scientists' refutation of them was published where only fellow scientists would see it. — Naomi Oreskes Copy Share Image
