Site: Trust, yet verify

Slant: Sceptic

Active: yes


Topics in which I have an interest are: catastrophic anthropogenic global warming & climate change, renewable energy sources, science communication, alarmism, media,… but especially the view of the layman in these issues.

Recent Articles

Trust, yet verify: IPCC AR6: continue assessing the science of climate change in line with policymakers’ priorities

This week, I came across this tweet from the IPCC: Apparently, there is (in the meantime “was”) a meeting in Montreal to agree the outlines of AR6. Interesting. However, it was the quote of Youba Sokona that caught my attention (my emphasis): “This meeting will pave the way for IPCC scientists to continue assessing the

2017-09-10 21:31   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: The fifty-times-more-deaths-by-weather news item: the contribution of the “expert”

In previous two posts, I explained a television news item explaining the scientific paper in which was proposed that there would be fifty times more deaths in the period 2070 to 2100. This post will focus on the dubious contribution of the expert in that news item. It was not really clear to me why

2017-09-03 23:00   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: The one and only solution

Continuing from previous post in which I described the start of a television news item on the modeled impacts of future weather on Europe. After that introduction, an expert was brought up to explain the paper a bit more, in this case Serge De Gheldere. As far as I know, he is an engineer (specialized

2017-08-21 00:06   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: Fifty times more deaths by weather

The hyperbole level was high in this news item from the VTM news of last Saturday: Fifty Times More Deaths By Weather. This is how it is introduced (translated from Dutch): South and Central Europe are moaning under a heatwave these days and this has consequences. In Italy, for example, is it up to 46

2017-08-07 22:30   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: Cancer risks versus Climate risks

It was quite hectic in the last month. Now the dust is slowly starting to settle, I will try to pick up blogging again. The subject of previous post was the statement that climate scientists are as certain about climate risks as oncologists on cancer risks that come with smoking. I ended that post being

2017-07-31 22:18   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: “Climate Risks” as conclusive as the link between Smoking and Lung cancer?

Via the Cliscep post “Don’t call me an alarmist,” says alarmist, I landed on this livescience article: Treading the Fine Line Between Climate Talk and Alarmism. It is an op-ed written by Sarah E. Myhre about climate change communication and her wish not being called an alarmist. One thing that caught my attention in the

2017-06-25 22:15   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: selecting 33 answers in just ONE minute?

Looking at the data of the second experiment of the Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation paper, I came across something rather strange. The time to complete the survey was recorded also and some of the participants finished the survey in an incredibly short timespan. Let me first explain how I got there. I incidentally stumbled on

2017-06-17 18:26   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: the conclusion that could not be a conclusion

This is already the third post on the Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation paper of Cook, Lewandowsky and Ecker (2017). This post will focus on one paragraph in the general conclusions of this paper (my emphasis): The ongoing focus on questioning the consensus, in concert with the gateway belief status of perceived consensus, underscores the importance

2017-06-10 12:24   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: false balance and the perceived consensus

When I hear the complaint that there is a problem with false balance media coverage in the climate debate, then I am always surprised. False balance meaning both sides of the debate getting equal time, so the perception is that they are both equally likely, even when this is not the case. Personally, I am

2017-06-09 00:19   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: definitions (or the lack thereof)

John Cook and Stephan Lewandowsky (together with Ulrich Ecker) have released a new paper at the beginning of May 2017. It is called Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. The paper is about (skeptical) “misconceptions” and how to “neutralize” them by means of the inoculation theory. It is a topic…

2017-06-04 21:51   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: Mindfulness and sustainable behavior: how to find a correlation where none might exist

Since recently I discovered that there is a whole field of what is called ecopsychology. A couple days ago I started reading a paper by Amel, Manning, Scott and Koger (probably more about that later) and I wondered whether those four had previous papers as well on the subject. Apparently they had. Members of this

2017-05-25 23:54   Click to comment

Trust, yet verify: It is not fair!

Yet another puzzling Facebook post from the owner of the Tesla powerwall (translated from Dutch, my bold emphasis): Thanks to the backwards running meter, we did NOT receive an electricity invoice in the first 7 years (there are no fixed cost at Ecopower). However, this is not fair, since we have still put 70% (see

2017-05-01 05:39   Click to comment


comments powered by Disqus
30