Talking of truth or myth, climate change is in the news again. It turns out some of the science behind the global warming scare was wrong.  And the growing body of opinion that says the whole climate warning thing is nothing less than a money making scam, gathers new momentum.

 There is a snag, however, sceptics on climate change can be summarised by two words:

There is a problem with us humans, and it’s a problem scientists are all too familiar with.  It is called the conformation bias. Once we make up our mind about something we look for evidence to support that view.  It can be anything. We may decide we don’t like such and such a person, and from that moment on we ignore every good thing that person does, and see overwhelming evidence we are right.

The confirmation bias is everywhere.  And we are all guilty. That’s every one of us.

But nowhere is this bias more obvious than in the debate over climate change.

Take as an example the latest furore over some of the science behind melting glaciers in the world’s mountains.  It seems some of the science was wrong.  Therefore, conclude sceptics, climate change is wrong.

The truth is, the scientific evidence to support climate change is enormous, simply enormous. Inevitably, some of it is wrong, or based on false assumptions. The latest furore is over a scientific claim from 1990. The data behind that claim was wrong.  And the cynics jump on this. They ignore the wealth of research since which has made far more serious findings: Their confirmation bias tells them to ignore everything that contradicts their belief, and just home in on the odd bit of evidence that supports their view.

Take as another example, a claim climate change cynics make much of; that global temperatures stopped going up after the year 2000.  This claim is actually both false, and misleading. Firstly it is false because if you take average global temperate including sea temperature, instead of just average air temperate, then actually temperates were rising after 2000.

More to the point, the data the cynics are so fond of quoting was influenced by the El Nino of 1998.  This had the effect of increasing air temperate that year, but not sea temperatures. If we were to remove 1998 from the equation, then actually even global air temperate have been steadily rising since the millennium (And by the way, some take the cold winter we have been experiencing as proof climate change is wrong. They ignore that fact that Down Under this summer was especially hot.)

It is possible there is an explanation for rising temperatures that has nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels, but the fact is the world’s temperatures have being steadily rising since the Industrial Revolution, and this trend appears to be continuing.

Take as another example, the argument that there are vested interests among the climate change lobby. This argument is too rich for words. The value of proven oil reserves is around $60 trillion dollars. If you want to see where the vested interests lie, look at the other side of the debate.

Some cynics claim that the debate is one sided. The problem here is that the number of scientists who believe in man made climate change so grossly outnumber the cynics that it is difficult to air both sides.  And indeed, by airing both sides you create the false impression that scientific opinion is split down the middle.

The real problem with the climate change cynics, however, lies with two words.

These words are: ‘wishful thinking.’ No sensible person wants the man made climate change hypothesis to be right. But, alas, that is not a good enough reason to reject it. Wishful thinking, has fed our confirmation bias. Battling that is a hugely difficult task, and that is why scientists who express the cynical side are treated with such scorn. |

 PS For more on the Confirmation Bias see this extract, taken from Bubbles and Wisdom, a new book co-written by the Investment and Business new editor and founder Michael Baxter:

We have a tendency to look for evidence which supports a view we already hold, but, more importantly, tend to dismiss evidence which contradicts our view. And we all do it. The confirmation bias can explain why different crowds operating in relative isolation from each other take on such opposite views. So, the US sees Iran as part of the axis of evil, Iran sees the US as the Big Satan. People in both cultures see ample evidence to support their view. The conformation bias is the stuff wars are often made from. It is the material that makes up bigotry and prejudice