Energy analyst Dr. John Berger's Climate Myths: The Campaign against Climate Science expertly separates climate fact from misinformation, and is especially good at reminding us of past deceptions put out by fossil fuel companies. Who can forget, for instance, The Greening Earth Society?
"A creation of the Western Fuels Association," writes Berger, "…this benevolent-sounding "green organization" served as a gateway to coal, oil, and mining-industry-funded think tanks and institutes as well as to publications rife with misinformation. Some of the materials circulated by the "Just Say "No" to Climate Change" folks even tareted elementary school children through their teachers."
Berger's slim and inexpensive book serves as a good introduction to climate misinformation. Yet being a book, it must contend with a couple of difficult realities.
One is simply the nature of climate change, which, not to put too fine a point on it, means change. How can any book keep up with the thousands of scientific papers published annually?
Not to mention the millions upon millions spent annual on disinformation by fossil fuel interests. Forests could fall for new editions of Berger's book, and still do little more than point the finger at the legions of skeptics (which, as SF Mike pointed out years ago, resemble the villain of the Harry Potter series, in that they cannot be named without being strengthened).
That's why when it comes to battling misinformation, this book is helpful, but so is Australian John Cook's deeply informed questioning of the "skeptics" on his site Skeptical Science. (Which, oddly enough, has a title that similarly is a little confusing. Cook's title sounds a little like a "skeptics" site, and Berger's book title sounds a little like a denier's.)
To add to the similarity, this week in Skeptical Science, to give an example, Cook features a piece by climate scientist Kevin Trenberth — who coincidentally wrote the introduction to Berger's "Climate Myths!"
What it comes down to is topicality and preference: If you would like a well-focused introduction to the topic in book form, read Climate Myths, where in the introduction Trenberth notes:
In science, being skeptical comes with the territory, but to deny basic facts makes no sense at all.
Or, if you prefer the topicality, and don't mind being overwhelmed (or reading off a screen), one can keep up with the science and learn as well from the likes of Skeptical Science, Jeff Masters, RealClimate, or countless others.
In his piece on Skeptical Science, for instance, Trenberth notes:
Focusing on the wiggles [noise in the rise of the global average temperature] and ignoring the bigger picture of unabated warming is foolhardy, but an approach promoted by climate change deniers.
Berger's aim is true. The only catch is, he's after a moving target.
Kit Stolz 