Panel: Climate Science: the use and abuse of consensus
14:00 - 15:30
Panel: Climate Science: the use and abuse of consensus
Frank Furedi, executive director, MCC Brussels
Professor Anthony O’Hear, professor of philosophy, University of Buckingham
Calum Nicholson, director, Climate Policy Institute
Professor Richard Lindzen, Sloan professor of atmospheric sciences emeritus, MIT; member, US National Academy of Science
Chair: Agnieszka Kolek, head of cultural engagement, MCC Brussels
Climate science in its contemporary form came of age in the 1970s at a time of a great cultural shift. The world’s first Earth Day in 1970 marked the spread of cultural concerns about environmentalism from the fringes of the hippy counterculture into the mainstream. The science of climate change arrived at a time when optimism about what science and technology had to offer was challenged by increasing concerns that the arrogance of human social and economic development was leading to negative environmental impacts, and even direct threats to the planet itself.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established in 1988, quickly became a forum for the exchange and assessment of an immense amount of growing scientific knowledge and understanding. Yet the IPCC also became regarded as the arbiter of what ‘the science’ tells us about what must be done, what political decisions must be taken and what policies must be enacted. It sits like Solomon over key questions of international development, sovereignty and social progress.
While there are different policy perspectives on the question of how to respond to climate change, one central message dominates the discussion. This is that ‘the science’ has issued humanity with a warning that our activities threaten our very existence, and that ‘the science’ tells us we must rein these activities in. Because the message appears to come from science, not politicians or campaigners, it becomes a fait accompli.
How then are we to make sense of the relationship between climate science and society? Has the scientific debate been politicised – whether that be in terms of underplaying or overplaying the dangers presented by climate change – and how can we protect against this danger? How much of the global warming issue is shaped by new scientific discoveries, and how much by broader cultural and political trends? How has the interaction between scientists, international institutions, governments, media and activists influenced the development of climate change policy? Most importantly, how can we best ensure a scientifically informed substantive political debate about how we should view and respond to climate change?
This panel is part of the event Climate Change: beyond the ’consensus’:
1 view
347
93
1 month ago 00:03:38 1
‘Piece of garbage’: John Kerry slammed for labelling the First Amendment a ‘major block’
1 month ago 00:11:16 1
Сделали максимум функций умного дома в 70 кв. м! Полный фарш! Интеллектуальный климат и свет
2 months ago 00:11:22 1
“Is It Too Late to Avoid Serious Impacts of Climate Change“ | Harvard Thinks Green
2 months ago 00:02:04 1
2025 TOYOTA CENTURY: Redefining Ultra-Luxury and Timeless Elegance [INTERIOR, FEATURES, COLOURS]
2 months ago 00:09:51 2
SWAP Polo из ХМАО установка климата, подогрев лобового, MFA+, подогрев сидений, стеклоподъемники
2 months ago 00:04:10 1
ASEZ Future Leader Forum at Columbia University | WMSCOG
2 months ago 00:03:24 1
Как сделать тепло в салоне зимой Nissan. Жара в салоне Ниссан Кашкай. Калибровка климата (печки).
3 months ago 00:00:10 1
“Daily Chuckles: Your Source for Hilarious Laughter!“
3 months ago 00:11:56 1
2024 Hyundai Grandeur - Exclusive Luxury Sedan Details