New Resources of Note

Just a quick note; in some ways things are getting better. Here are some new resources to take note of.

The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) has long been in the forefront of the battle to keep superstitious creationism out of the public school curriculum. They are now taking on climate change. John Timmer at Ars Technica has the scoop.

An trendy, easy-on-the-eyes design leaves an immediate suspicion that the new site Talking Climate: The Gateway to Research on Climate Communication knows what it is talking about.

The Canadians have gotten in on the act with a Science Media Centre, though this is not exclusively climate-focused. And the no longer brand-new Australian effort at The Conversation is going strong.

And finally, as reported in the New York Times, a Climate Science Legal Defense Fund has been set up in the USA. Special kudos are due to Scott Mandia for his efforts here.

To be a bit churlish, these are among the sorts of things we ought to have started doing some time ago. Better late than never, but it is very very late. Nevertheless, the new energy in defending and advancing science in general and climate science in particular is a welcome development.

Comments:

  1. Links for Climate Science Defense Fund on Facebook and Twitter:

    FB: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Climate-Science-Legal-Defense-Fund/317981791576508?sk=wall

    Twitter: @ClimSciDefense https://twitter.com/#!/ClimSciDefense

  2. Here are some more "things we ought to have started doing some time ago" to make the communications ecosystem work smoothly -

    1. A clearinghouse for booking science-aligned, vetted speakers on climate change for local communities - the Climate Reality Project is currently the only org I'm aware of that's working to fill this role, but the speakers, who are volunteers, can and do (in my perhaps-stale understanding) put whatever they please into their presentations, which can vary substantially.

    2. A site to submit climate presentations for review by climate science and/or climate communication experts? (maybe a compare&contrast set of videos, of someone making every mistake in the book, vs. following guidelines?)

    3. Maybe the NCSE could award certifications to climate-science-literate TV weathercasters who're motivated to inform their audience? (somebody needs to do this, if it's not AMS)

    4. A "MediaBugs.org" equivalent for logging roadblocks in climate communication, perhaps just ones that could be fairly easily fixed - e.g. the NWS “Climate Prediction Center”, which justs predicts likely weather for just several months ahead, can contribute to confusion via audience conflation of its “short-term likely weather” climate with the more typical "30-yr" climate - which is disturbing, given the very different influencers & outcomes of the two. (Despite this potential for confusion, in public outreach the CPC spokesmen might not be clearly drawing this distinction.)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.