There is a robust scientific consensus concerning climate change and evolution. But many
people reject these expert views, in favour of beliefs that are strongly at variance with the …

The aim of this paper is to address the neglected but important problem of differentiating
between epistemically beneficial and epistemically detrimental dissent. By “dissent,” we …

Abstract In 1995, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change announced that
anthropogenic climate change had become discernible. Since then, numerous independent …

Assigning credibility or expertise is a fraught issue, particularly in a wicked phenomenon like
climate change—as Anderegg et al.(1) discussed in a recent issue of PNAS. However, their …

Any set of phenomena admits of more than one theoretical explanation. In the short or long
run testing and experimentation and basic methodological maxims tend to reduce a set of …

Social scientists have offered a number of explanations for why Americans commonly deny
that human-caused climate change is real. In this paper, I argue that these explanations …

Scientists overwhelmingly agree that climate change exists and is caused by human activity.
It has been argued that communicating the consensus can counter climate scepticism, given …

There is a large gap between the specialized knowledge of scientists and laypeopleLs
understanding of the sciences. The novice-expert problem arises when non-experts are …

Many climate scientists have made claims that may suggest that evidence used in tuning or
calibrating a climate model cannot be used to evaluate the model. By contrast, the …

Advocates have sought to prove that underdetermination obtains because all theories have
empirical equivalents. But algorithms for generating empirical equivalents simply exchange …