The debate about whether global warming is actually happening is over...except it's not. Despite scientific consensus, the entrenched ideology of climate change denial continues, except now the discourse has devolved into conspiracy mongering and name calling.
- Looking at the graph, the “spike” essentially starts and runs through the 20th century. Speculate on the reasons why this surge may have occurred. What sorts of activities were going on in the world at that time which may account for these changes?
- Myth #3 essentially states that Mann’s study is claiming that the 20th century was the warmest century in 1000 years. Mann attacks the myth by saying that the critics have mis-characterized his conclusions. So if the study is NOT saying that the 20th century was the hottest century, then what does it conclude?
- Paraphrase the differences between “regional climate change” and “large-scale climate change.” What parallels can you locate between this comparison and question #2 in Blog #4?
- Mann sites many references in support of his position. Looking over the references on page 81, how would you determine whether or not these are reliable sources? What are the indicators of ethos in those references?
- On a related topic, Mann questions the ethos of Soon. What is the problem with where soon has gotten published?
- The term “anomalous” is used often in Mann’s discussion. What does it mean? Why is it key to Mann’s theory?
- Mann admits that there are errors in the “Hockey Stick’ study. In your own words, summarize these errors. Why, according to Mann, are these errors unimportant?
- Consider the credentials of the climate researches behind the “Hockey Stick” study and those who are critical of Mann’s conclusions. What are the various backgrounds (i.e., what fields of study are mentioned) in each camp? How would knowing the specialty of the climate change deniers impact their ethos?