New Study shows that Climate Skeptics are smarter

[mop]

Yes, I am dead serious. There is a new study coming out of Yale that clearly surprised the researchers. Rather than finding that climate skeptics were on average dumber and less informed on issues of climate and a basic understanding of Science, they found that it was the exact opposite. Needless to say, they are trying very hard to spin the results and make it about pre-conceived biases, but it is amusing to watch the spin party.

Here is a link to an article still trying to bash skeptics, but reading the comments to follow is just part of the fun:

Biggest problem with climate skeptics may be their confidence

evidently, on average we are better at math, better recall basic facts of science and better able to articulate our disagreement than those who accept global warming theory. having said that, those who are more inclined to leftward thinking can also become more convinced of AGW the more educated they get, so the sword does cut both ways.

 

[Crockett]

Hell. Now when I disagree with you I can't assume it's because you are stupid.

 

[mop]

nice…of course, this is "on average" so you can still consider me an absolute ignoramus if you prefer!

 

[mop]

nice of course, this is "on average" so you can still consider me an absolute ignoramus if you prefer!

 

[GT WT]

That's a great essay, MOP. Thanks for linking. What it seems to be saying is that better educated Republicans are less likely to accept science than well-educated Democrats.

Thus politics is an important determinant of science denial.

 

[mop]

GT, that's the one "rescue" takeaway that the columnist has as well as those who really don't want to believe the results. but notice that it correlates negatively with Democrats. in other words, the less knowledgeable a Democrat is about science and math, the more likely they are to believe in climate science. so it isn't as clear cut as you make it sound. in fact, it seems that it really does cut both ways, but certainly it makes the strong point that those who question climate science are not a bunch of idiots as is often implied.

i am not sure exactly what it all means, but it is interesting how science can replace religion for those on the left, whereas those on the right can be more educated and more knowledgeable but still feel comfortable disagreeing with widely accepted theories.

 

[GT WT]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[mop]

GT, you are right, I read too quickly and misunderstood Mooney's point. However it is nonetheless true, according to the study, that:

In reply to:

---

---

 

[RomaVicta]

So this is a contest of which non-experts are the smartest? How does that impact anyone's belief/denial of the scientific communities seeming consensus on global warming?

 

[mop]

RV, it doesn't prove anything along those lines, it is just interesting fodder. i wasn't trying to build any argument on it, just knew it would be fascinating discussion for this board where we skeptics are often painted as ignorant and uneducated.

 

[Dionysus]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[mop]

Dionysus…..some people of faith believe things only because they have been told them. The same goes for those who reject faith and then scan the horizon for something that they can trust absolutely. the trust placed in science is indeed a good analogue for that sort of thinking.

now, i am not saying that everyone who has faith has faith for that reason, whether it is in God or in science….i am just saying that they can indeed be similar expressions of the same instinct.

 

[mop]

Dionysus..some people of faith believe things only because they have been told them. The same goes for those who reject faith and then scan the horizon for something that they can trust absolutely. the trust placed in science is indeed a good analogue for that sort of thinking.

now, i am not saying that everyone who has faith has faith for that reason, whether it is in God or in science. i am just saying that they can indeed be similar expressions of the same instinct.