Climate Change Book Reviews - Index

Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, (Bloomsbury Press, New York, 2010), pages 355

This is an excellent book - an interesting story well told.

The authors confront the question why there was or is so much doubt among the public, and why it took or has taken so long for governments to act in relation to the consensus view of scientists on environmental issues such as smoking, second hand smoke, acid rain, the ozone hole, and global warming.

An easy answer to this question is to look at the vested corporate interests, and examine how they have applied their money and resources to through quasi-research studies, public relations campaigns, lobbying, support for think-tanks that are supposedly independent, etc. It is unfortunate that no one is surprised when corporations carry out actions that they know are morally wrong when their business is threatened.

The authors offer more subtle insights. It is not just corporate interests at work. The authors outline the role of a handful of individuals with scientific training have played in casting doubt on the scientific consensus on environmental issues. The authors systematically track through the issues of smoking, second hand smoke, acid rain, the ozone hole, global warming and even pesticides, and tell the story about the role played by this handful of scientists in manipulating politicians, journalists and the public and in delaying meaningful action.

Regardless of the issue, their techniques were the same. These techniques included:

1. Misrepresenting the science and scientists.
2. Raising arguments and concerns about the science that do not stand up to scrutiny.
3. Presenting false or misleading information.
4. Refusing to correct false or misleading information, or incorrect arguments and refuted points.
5. Attacking the scientists involved without justification, following the old adage that if you do not like the message, discredit the messenger.
6. Presenting themselves as scientists, despite the fact that the definition of "scientist" normally includes the concept of searching for truth when they were not so engaged, and despite the fact they were individuals trained in science, whose research work was many years in the past, and whose expertise was not in either health or the environment - subjects they became involved in.
7. Presenting personal views as somehow equivalent to peer-reviewed science, when as scientifically trained individuals, they knew better.

After history has proven them wrong on a string of issues, one wonders why a number of media organizations continue to pay attention to those that are still alive.

And who are these "merchants of doubt"? Fred Seitz, Fred Singer, William Nierenberg, and Robert Jastrow.

Top of Page