Science & Education

, Volume 22, Issue 8, pp 2019–2030 | Cite as

Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change: A Response to Legates, Soon and Briggs

  • Daniel BedfordEmail author
  • John Cook


Agnotology is a term that has been used to describe the study of ignorance and its cultural production (Proctor in Agnotology: the making and unmaking of ignorance. Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2008). For issues that are contentious in the societal realm, though largely not in the scientific realm, such as human evolution or the broad basics of human-induced climate change, it has been suggested that explicit study of relevant misinformation might be a useful teaching approach (Bedford in J Geogr 109(4):159–165, 2010). Recently, Legates et al. (Sci Educ. doi: 10.1007/s11191-013-9588-3, 2013) published an aggressive critique of Bedford’s (J Geogr 109(4):159–165, 2010) proposals. However, the critique is based on a comprehensive misinterpretation of Bedford’s (J Geogr 109(4):159–165, 2010) paper. Consequently, Legates et al. (Sci Educ. doi: 10.1007/s11191-013-9588-3, 2013) address arguments not actually made by Bedford (J Geogr 109(4):159–165, 2010). This article is a response to Legates et al. (Sci Educ. doi: 10.1007/s11191-013-9588-3, 2013), and demonstrates their errors of interpretation of Bedford (J Geogr 109(4):159–165, 2010) in several key areas: the scientific consensus on climate change; misinformation and the public perception of the scientific consensus on climate change; and agnotology as a teaching tool. We conclude by arguing that, although no single peer-reviewed publication on climate change, or any other scientific issue, should be accepted without due scrutiny, the existence of a scientific consensus—especially one as overwhelming as exists for human-induced climate change—raises the level of confidence that the overall findings of that consensus are correct.


Climate Change Global Warming Content Knowledge Public Perception Scientific Consensus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Allison, I., Bindoff, N. L., Bindschadler, R. A., Cox, P. M., de Noblet, N., England, M. H., et al. (2011). The Copenhagen diagnosis: Updating the world on the latest climate science. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  2. Anderegg, W. R., Prall, J. W., Harold, J., & Schneider, S. H. (2010). Expert credibility in climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(27), 12107–12109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bedford, D. (2010). Agnotology as a teaching tool: Learning climate science by studying misinformation. Journal of Geography, 109(4), 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benestad, R. E., Hygen, H. O., Dorland, R. V., Cook, J., & Nuccitelli, D. (2013). Agnotology: Learning from mistakes. Earth System Dynamics Discussions, 4(1), 451–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackman-Woods, R., Boswell, T., Cawsey, I., Dorries, N., Harris, E., Iddon, B., Marsden, G., Naysmith, D., Spink, B., Stewart, I., Stringer, G., Turner, D., & Wilson, R. (2010). The disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. Accessed May 21, 2013.
  6. Boykoff, M. T. (2011). Who speaks for the climate?: Making sense of media reporting on climate change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the U.S. prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brysse, K., Oreskes, N., O’Reilly, J., & Oppenheimer, M. (2013). Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama? Global Environmental Change, 23(1), 327–337.Google Scholar
  9. Coll, S. (2012). Private empire: ExxonMobil and American power. New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cook, J., Nuccitelli, D., Green, S. A., Richardson, M., Winkler, B., Painting, R., et al. (2013). Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature. Environmental Research Letters, 8(2), 024024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crichton, M. (2004). State of fear. New York: Avon Books, HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  12. Cushman, J. H., Jr. (1998). Industrial group plans to battle climate treaty. The New York Times April 26 1998. Accessed May 14, 2013.
  13. Doran, P. T., & Zimmerman, M. K. (2009). Examining the scientific consensus on climate change. Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 90(3), 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., & Tang, D. T. W. (2010). Explicit warnings reduce but do not eliminate the continued influence of misinformation. Memory & Cognition, 38, 1087–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elsasser, S. W., & Dunlap, R. E. (2012). Leading voices in the denier choir: Conservative columnists’ dismissal of global warming and denigration of climate science. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(6), 754–776.Google Scholar
  16. Farmer, G. T., & Cook, J. (2013). Climate change science: A modern synthesis (pp. 445–466). Springer: Netherlands.Google Scholar
  17. Foley, H., Scaroni, A., & Yekel, C. (2010). RA-10 Inquiry Report: Concerning the allegations of research misconduct against Dr. Michael E. Mann, Department of Meteorology, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University. Accessed May 21, 2013.
  18. Freudenburg, W. R., & Muselli, V. (2010). Global warming estimates, media expectations, and the asymmetry of scientific challenge. Global Environmental Change, 20(3), 483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hoggan, J., & Littlemore, R. (2009). Climate cover-up: The crusade to deny global warming. Vancouver, Toronto, Berkeley: Greystone Books.Google Scholar
  20. Kowalski, P., & Taylor, A. K. (2009). The effect of refuting misconceptions in the introductory psychology class. Teaching of Psychology, 36(3), 153–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Legates, D. R., Soon, W., & Briggs, W. M. (2013). Learning and teaching climate science: The perils of consensus knowledge using agnotology. Science & Education,. doi: 10.1007/s11191-013-9588-3.Google Scholar
  23. Leiserowitz, A. (2008) American opinions on global warming: A Yale University/Gallup/ClearVision poll. AmericansGlobalWarmingReport.pdf. Accessed May 14, 2013.
  24. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G., & Howe, P. (2012). Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in September, 2012. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Accessed May 14, 2013.
  25. Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G., & Howe, P. (2013). Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in April, 2013. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Accessed May 14, 2013.
  26. Lindzen, R. S. (2009). The climate science isn’t settled. The Wall Street Journal November 30 2009. Accessed May 14, 2013.
  27. McCright, A. M., & Dunlap, R. E. (2000). Challenging global warming as a social problem: an analysis of the conservative movement’s counter-claims. Social Problems, 47, 499–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Muller, D. A., Bewes, J., Sharma, M. D., & Reiman, P. (2008). Saying the wrong thing: Improving learning with multimedia by including misconceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 144–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Muller, D. A., & Sharma, M. D. (2012, October). Tackling misconceptions in introductory physics using multimedia presentations. In Proceedings of the Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference).Google Scholar
  30. Murdock, D. (2008). Globe may be cooling on global warming. Scripps Howard News Service. Accessed 22 April 2009.
  31. Nisbet, M. C., & Myers, T. (2007). Twenty years of public opinion about global warming. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(3), 444–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Oreskes, N. (2004). The scientific consensus on climate change. Science, 3606(5702), 1686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Oreskes, N. (2007). The scientific consensus on climate change: How do we know we’re not wrong? In J. F. C. DiMento & P. Doughman (Eds.), Climate change: What it means for us, our children, and our grandchildren (pp. 65–99). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Oreskes, N. (2010). My facts are better than your facts: spreading good news about global warming. In M. S. Morgan & P. Howlett (Eds.), How do facts travel? (pp. 135–166). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2008). Challenging knowledge: How climate science became a victim of the cold war. In R. N. Proctor & L. Schiebinger (Eds.), Agnotology: The making and unmaking of ignorance (pp. 55–89). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
  37. Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oxburgh, R. (2010). Report of the International Panel set up by the University of East Anglia to examine the research of the Climatic Research Unit. Accessed May 21, 2013.
  39. Peterson, T. C., Connolley, W. M., & Fleck, J. (2008). The myth of the 1970s global cooling scientific consensus. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89(9), 1325–1337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pew. (2012). More say there is solid evidence of global warming. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Accessed May 14, 2013.
  41. Plimer, I. (2009). Heaven & earth: Global warming, the missing science. Ballan, Victoria, Australia: Connor Court Publishing Pty Ltd.Google Scholar
  42. Proctor, R. N. (2008). Agnotology: A missing term to describe the cultural production of ignorance (and its study). In R. N. Proctor & L. Schiebinger (Eds.), Agnotology: The making and unmaking of ignorance (pp. 1–33). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Rahmstorf, S., Foster, G., & Cazenave, A. (2012). Comparing climate projections to observations up to 2011. Environmental Research Letters, 7(4), 044035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Russell, M., Boulton, G., Clarke, P., Eyton, D. & Norton, J. (2010). The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review. Accessed May 21, 2013.
  45. Shwed, U., & Bearman, P. S. (2010). The temporal structure of scientific consensus formation. American Sociological Review, 75(6), 817–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stroeve, J., Serreze, M., Drobot, S., Gearheard, S., Holland, M., Maslanik, J., et al. (2008). Arctic sea ice extent plummets in 2007. Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 89(2), 13–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. The Economist. (2007). Climate change: A hot topic gets hotter. March 15. Accessed May 15, 2013.
  48. The Great Global Warming Swindle. (2007). DVD. Directed by M. Durkin. London, UK: Wag TV.Google Scholar
  49. Wald, M. L. (1991). Pro-coal ad campaign disputes warming idea. The New York Times July 08 1991. Accessed May 29, 2013.
  50. Walsh, J. E., & Chapman, W. L. (2001). 20th-century sea-ice variations from observational data. Annals of Glaciology, 33(1), 444–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Washington, H., & Cook, J. (2011). Climate change denial: Heads in the sand. London, UK, & Washington, DC: Earthscan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geography DepartmentWeber State UniversityOgdenUSA
  2. 2.Global Change InstituteUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  3. 3.School of PsychologyUniversity of Western AustraliaPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations