Is Global Warming a Case of Scientific Consensus or Groupthink?

In summary, The conversation discusses the legitimacy of the Iraq war and the role of groupthink in creating the belief in weapons of mass destruction. It also compares groupthink in climate science and politics and questions the validity of the concept of global warming. The conversation suggests that exaggerated scare stories may be a result of policy-based evidence rather than evidence-based policies. The conversation concludes by stating that just because something is claimed to be true by those with ulterior motives, it doesn't mean it is automatically false.
  • #1
Some time ago I wondered about the legitimacy of the Irak war in regards to the non-existence of weapons of mass destruction. I contended that the WMD element was not a deceptive lie but merely the result of the groupthinking mechanism.

On other occasions I tried to demonstrate that some symptoms of groupthink were not alien in climate science like for instance here.

Would be reading the PW&A forums of PF? I see some remarkable simularities.

Global Warming as Groupthink - The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's process institutionalizes groupthink on a global scale.

...Can so many experts be wrong? ... Then intelligence agencies around the world were allegedly so convinced that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that we went to war, only to find—zilch. ... there was a solid foundation of truth on which enthusiastic professionals and governments constructed an exaggerated scare story that the media lapped up...
..It is clear that while governments think they are pursuing evidence-based policies, these institutes have been serving up "policy-based evidence."...

So is AGW real or just another element in a long list of human behavior excesses? This list would include the revolutions and wars, anything that requires an enemy, exagarated by groupthink.
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on
  • #2
Andre said:
So is AGW real or just another element in a long list of human behavior excesses?
It could be both. Just because a bunch of delusional pathological liars and propagandists claim something to be true doesn't automatically make it false.

Of course if Al Gore told me there was no monster under my bed, I'd never sleep again. But still...
  • #3

As a scientist, it is important to approach any issue with an open mind and rely on evidence-based research. With regards to the topic of global warming and groupthink, it is important to consider the overwhelming amount of scientific evidence that supports the existence of human-caused climate change.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is composed of thousands of scientists from around the world who have conducted extensive research on the impacts of climate change. Their findings have been reviewed and approved by governments and scientific experts, making it a highly credible and reliable source of information.

While it is true that groupthink can occur in any field, it is important to differentiate between groupthink and scientific consensus. Scientific consensus is not based on groupthink, but rather on a thorough evaluation and replication of evidence by independent researchers.

Furthermore, the comparison to the Iraq war and WMDs is not applicable to the issue of climate change. The evidence for the existence of human-caused climate change is not based on speculation or political agendas, but on decades of research and data from multiple scientific disciplines.

As scientists, it is our responsibility to continue to conduct research and gather evidence to better understand the complexities of climate change and its impacts. It is not a matter of belief or opinion, but rather a matter of scientific fact.

Related to Is Global Warming a Case of Scientific Consensus or Groupthink?

1. What is Peter Lilley's stance on global warming?

Peter Lilley, a British Conservative politician, has been a vocal skeptic of the idea of man-made global warming. He has expressed doubts about the scientific consensus on climate change and has criticized efforts to reduce carbon emissions.

2. Why is Peter Lilley's opinion on global warming controversial?

Lilley's stance on global warming is controversial because it goes against the overwhelming scientific evidence and the majority of political leaders who recognize the urgency of addressing climate change. His views have also been criticized for being influenced by funding from the fossil fuel industry.

3. Has Peter Lilley taken any action to address global warming?

Lilley has been a vocal opponent of policies aimed at reducing carbon emissions, such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. He has also voted against legislation to address climate change in the UK Parliament.

4. What evidence does Peter Lilley use to support his views on global warming?

Lilley has cited studies and data that question the link between human activities and climate change. He has also argued that the costs of addressing global warming are too high and that there are more pressing issues that should be addressed.

5. How do other scientists and experts respond to Peter Lilley's views on global warming?

The majority of scientists and experts in the field of climate change reject Lilley's views and argue that the evidence for man-made global warming is overwhelming. They argue that urgent action is needed to mitigate the impacts of climate change and that denying its existence will only worsen the problem.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
  • General Discussion