00:11:01:24 , 00:11:03:25 , That's great, and really really useful,
00:11:03:25 , 00:11:06:19 , but the problem arises when we don't realize we're doing it,
00:11:06:19 , 00:11:08:10 , because it can cause mistakes.
00:11:08:10 , 00:11:10:17 , When I get disheartened with all of the really confident and
00:11:10:17 , 00:11:14:13 , and totally incorrect stuff I hear from most people who are skeptical about climate change,
00:11:14:13 , 00:11:17:10 , I have to remind myself that their brains are just doing what they are supposed to:
00:11:17:10 , 00:11:21:08 , filling in gaps in a really complicated picture, using past experience.
00:11:21:08 , 00:11:26:13 , For instance, I often hear: "How arrogant to think that humans can change the planet—we're so small."
00:11:26:13 , 00:11:30:08 , Well now that you're more aware of how bias and preconceived notions influence conclusions,
00:11:30:08 , 00:11:33:13 , can you identify the past experience coming into play there?
00:11:33:13 , 00:11:35:12 , It's probably that throughout human history,
00:11:35:12 , 00:11:37:28 , the weather and climate have always been acting on us,
00:11:37:28 , 00:11:39:23 , and never the other way around.
00:11:39:23 , 00:11:42:17 , So I guess it's not surprising that people feel that way.
00:11:42:17 , 00:11:45:17 , But it is disheartening, because I wish they would be a little bit more humble.
00:11:45:17 , 00:11:47:28 , To acknowledge that—hey—you might be wrong.
00:11:47:28 , 00:11:50:13 , Think of it this way: the only way to ever improve,
00:11:50:13 , 00:11:52:12 , is to admit that you might be wrong.
00:11:52:12 , 00:11:54:12 , Not one of us is infallible.
00:11:54:12 , 00:11:56:11 , That means that each of us—you and me included—
00:11:56:11 , 00:11:59:26 , is right now carrying around some beliefs that are mistaken.
00:11:59:26 , 00:12:01:22 , If we don't acknowledge that we may have some,
00:12:01:22 , 00:12:03:15 , then we'll never get a chance to get rid of them—
00:12:03:15 , 00:12:06:15 , to trade them in for more correct or more useful beliefs.
00:12:06:15 , 00:12:10:21 , That means you'll never improve, and will die no more correct than you are right now.
00:12:10:21 , 00:12:12:24 , I don't know about you, but the idea that I am right now
00:12:12:24 , 00:12:15:02 , as good as I will ever be is oppressive to me
00:12:15:02 , 00:12:16:22 , —as well as being flat out ridiculous.
00:12:16:22 , 00:12:20:19 , I mean, what are the chances that you know everything, correctly, right now?
00:12:20:19 , 00:12:23:06 , That's one reason why I got frustrated during the online debate
00:12:23:06 , 00:12:26:14 , about my original video "The Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See".
00:12:26:14 , 00:12:30:02 , When I reworked my argument in response to some holes that some people had poked in it,
00:12:30:02 , 00:12:31:15 , a couple people essentially said
00:12:31:15 , 00:12:34:10 , "So why should we listen to you now, since you admitted you were wrong before?"
00:12:34:10 , 00:12:36:29 , and say back smugly, convinced they'd won the debate.
00:12:36:29 , 00:12:41:02 , To them, I lost credibility because I changed my argument in response to the critiques.
00:12:41:02 , 00:12:42:11 , That's just crazy talk!
00:12:42:11 , 00:12:45:17 , In science and reasoning, admitting you're wrong makes you more reliable,
00:12:45:17 , 00:12:48:26 , because in the future, people can trust that if you're wrong, you'll change.
00:12:48:26 , 00:12:51:09 , If you never admit you're wrong, you lost credibility,
00:12:51:09 , 00:12:54:06 , because your claims of being right simply become unbelievable.
00:12:54:06 , 00:12:56:18 , No one is right all the time.
00:12:56:18 , 00:13:00:03 , In fact I would argue that it not only increases your credibility with others,
00:13:00:03 , 00:13:02:28 , but it increases your own happiness to admit that you're wrong.
00:13:02:28 , 00:13:04:08 , Here's what I mean.
00:13:04:08 , 00:13:10:11 , Let's say you choose to belong to that group of people who never admit that they're wrong.
00:13:10:11 , 00:13:12:03 , To themselves, or other people.
00:13:12:03 , 00:13:17:24 , Now there are two subgroups there: those who are actually never wrong,
00:13:17:24 , 00:13:21:07 , and those who are sometimes wrong.
00:13:25:20 , 00:13:29:06 , So if you're in this group, you're infallible, and life is good.
00:13:29:06 , 00:13:33:11 , If you're in this group, there will be times when you're wrong but you won't admit it.
00:13:33:11 , 00:13:34:25 , And bad things happen.
00:13:34:25 , 00:13:37:22 , You lose credibility with people, you get into nasty fights,
00:13:37:22 , 00:13:40:22 , you never learn anything new. Not a very happy situation.
00:13:40:22 , 00:13:43:29 , Let's say instead you choose to belong to the group of people
00:13:43:29 , 00:13:47:12 , who are willing to admit when they're wrong, to themselves and others.
00:13:47:12 , 00:13:51:11 , Again, two subgroups: those who are actually never wrong,
00:13:51:11 , 00:13:53:23 , and those who are sometimes wrong.
00:13:57:17 , 00:14:01:05 , Again, if you're actually infallible life is all giggles and joy.
00:14:01:05 , 00:14:03:20 , And over here, when you are wrong,
00:14:03:20 , 00:14:06:23 , and you admit it to yourself and others, good things happen.
00:14:06:23 , 00:14:10:15 , You have less nasty conflicts, people respect you more,
00:14:10:15 , 00:14:13:07 , your credibility goes up, and you learn things.
00:14:15:04 , 00:14:19:24 , So now, the question is, which group would you like to be in.
00:14:19:24 , 00:14:22:19 , Wouldn't you say there are probably very few of these people
00:14:22:19 , 00:14:26:01 , in all of human history, actually infallible humans?
00:14:26:01 , 00:14:29:08 , What are the chances that you or I are one of them?
00:14:29:08 , 00:14:33:24 , Since it's almost certain that you and I are going to be in one of these two groups,
00:14:33:24 , 00:14:37:19 , don't you think the better bet is this one, than this one?
00:14:37:19 , 00:14:39:06 , So how does this work in science?
00:14:39:06 , 00:14:41:11 , First, as I mentioned, scientists acknowledge that
00:14:41:11 , 00:14:43:13 , neither they, nor their instruments are perfect,
00:14:43:13 , 00:14:45:16 , and so they always include an estimate of the error
00:14:45:16 , 00:14:48:01 , or uncertainty in any scientific statement.
00:14:48:01 , 00:14:51:18 , Second, scientists take great pains to identify and isolate their assumptions,
00:14:51:18 , 00:14:54:25 , trying to identify and eliminate errors that they may be making.
00:14:54:25 , 00:14:56:28 , Third—and this is terribly important—
00:14:56:28 , 00:15:00:11 , they put their work out there and ask for criticism,
00:15:00:11 , 00:15:04:08 , so that weak points can be identified and strengthened, and the uncertainty reduced.
00:15:04:08 , 00:15:06:15 , That's sort of what I did with my scripts for this whole project.
00:15:06:15 , 00:15:10:19 , I gave them to the best critical thinker I know and said "Please find the holes in the argument."
00:15:10:19 , 00:15:13:04 , Because that's how I know that it gets better.
00:15:13:04 , 00:15:15:26 , That's why it's so important to ask if the statement you're hearing
00:15:15:26 , 00:15:18:07 , about climate change has been "peer–reviewed".
00:15:18:07 , 00:15:20:17 , That's the official process that science goes through to sift
00:15:20:17 , 00:15:23:26 , the solid, credible ideas from the sloppy science.
00:15:23:26 , 00:15:27:02 , Although it doesn't always work, it is a bruising, messy, drawn-out process
00:15:27:02 , 00:15:31:07 , designed to only let the best, most robust ideas float to the top.
00:15:31:07 , 00:15:34:26 , If something has been peer–reviewed, that generally means that it's methods are up to snuff,
00:15:34:26 , 00:15:37:04 , and the scientific community thinks its worth looking at.
00:15:37:04 , 00:15:41:08 , It's getting close to "the best answer science can give us."
00:15:41:08 , 00:15:42:28 , Keep in mind, it doesn't always work.
00:15:42:28 , 00:15:46:15 , Sometimes a peer–reviewed scientific article is shown to have significant problems.
00:15:46:15 , 00:15:47:27 , Guess what happens then?
00:15:47:27 , 00:15:50:13 , The peer–reviewed journal that published the research admits it,
00:15:50:13 , 00:15:54:16 , and sometimes even formally retracts the whole article, apologizing in the process!
00:15:54:16 , 00:15:57:16 , Why? To increase their credibility!
00:15:57:16 , 00:16:01:17 , Peer–review is the process science uses to get closer and closer to the truth,
00:16:01:17 , 00:16:04:12 , but it is critical to remember in this whole climate debate:
00:16:04:12 , 00:16:07:15 , science never claims to actually get there.
00:16:07:15 , 00:16:12:06 , That's the surprising thing: science—that most precise and anal of all human endeavors—
00:16:12:06 , 00:16:15:12 , is also the one to never claim to know the truth.
00:16:15:12 , 00:16:17:11 , Isn't it ironic? Don't you think?
00:16:17:11 , 00:16:19:01 , Another dynamic of science that's worth noting
00:16:19:01 , 00:16:21:26 , is that of establishing when one thing causes another,
00:16:21:26 , 00:16:24:07 , and when the two things are just correlated.
00:16:24:07 , 00:16:25:16 , Here's what I mean.
00:16:25:16 , 00:16:27:11 , If you look at this chart, it is clear that as
00:16:27:11 , 00:16:30:00 , the number of pirates in the world has decreased,
00:16:30:00 , 00:16:32:25 , the average global temperature has increased.
00:16:32:25 , 00:16:35:05 , There's the evidence, and no one disputes it.
00:16:35:05 , 00:16:36:22 , So what's the interpretation?
00:16:36:22 , 00:16:38:27 , That the lack of pirates causes global warming?
00:16:38:27 , 00:16:43:08 , That pirates combat global warming, and therefore we should start some pirate schools ASAP?
00:16:43:08 , 00:16:46:23 , This is an example of correlation, two things whose trends track each other.
00:16:46:23 , 00:16:50:02 , But science is careful to not yet say that one causes the other.
00:16:50:02 , 00:16:52:23 , For a serious example, it turns out that left–handed women contract
00:16:52:23 , 00:16:55:08 , breast cancer at a higher rate than right–handed women.
00:16:55:08 , 00:16:57:18 , So does left–handedness cause cancer?
00:16:57:18 , 00:17:00:03 , How does science go about answering that question?
00:17:00:03 , 00:17:03:08 , Well, it's complicated, but this much is useful for us lay people to know:
00:17:03:08 , 00:17:06:00 , If two things are correlated, but scientists can't find a way
00:17:06:00 , 00:17:09:10 , to feasibly explain the mechanism by which one influences the other,
00:17:09:10 , 00:17:12:06 , that is they can't explain why one would cause the other,
00:17:12:06 , 00:17:14:12 , then they are not considered cause and effect.
00:17:14:12 , 00:17:17:02 , That doesn't mean science says "they aren't cause and effect."
00:17:17:02 , 00:17:20:27 , It just means science says "We don't have any reason to believe they are cause and effect,"
00:17:20:27 , 00:17:23:22 , but they are always open to future ideas and evidence.
00:17:23:22 , 00:17:26:07 , Sometimes you hear the criticism: "Scientists can't even predict the weather,
00:17:26:07 , 00:17:29:30 , so why should we listen to them about something bigger, like the climate?"
00:17:29:30 , 00:17:33:15 , Well, that's a little bit like saying: mathematicians can't even predict how this coin flip will turn out,
00:17:33:15 , 00:17:37:09 , so why should we listen to their predictions of how a million coin flips will turn out?
00:17:37:09 , 00:17:39:15 , Climate is about averages and overall trends,
00:17:39:15 , 00:17:42:07 , which are easier to predict than a particulate occurrence.
00:17:42:07 , 00:17:45:16 , Also, the predictions are getting better and better over time.
00:17:45:16 , 00:17:48:20 , Remember: science never claims to have the exactly correct answer—
00:17:48:20 , 00:17:51:12 , that's just a misconception—and an inappropriate demand—
00:17:51:12 , 00:17:53:06 , by the public and the media.
00:17:53:06 , 00:17:56:14 , But the self–critical nature of science means that it tends to improve—
00:17:56:14 , 00:17:59:02 , which, incidentally, is why it's so disturbing that the predictions
00:17:59:02 , 00:18:02:08 , of climate change have gotten more dire as time has gone on.
00:18:02:08 , 00:18:04:04 , But it never is done.
00:18:04:04 , 00:18:06:09 , Sometimes you hear the criticism "There is no consensus
00:18:06:09 , 00:18:08:20 , among scientists about human–caused climate change."
00:18:08:20 , 00:18:11:14 , News flash! There's no consensus among scientists about anything!
00:18:11:14 , 00:18:13:25 , The inherent uncertainty of science means there will almost
00:18:13:25 , 00:18:16:13 , always be dissent on any scientific issue.
00:18:16:13 , 00:18:19:01 , Pick the most well–known, well–established scientific law you can think of.
00:18:19:01 , 00:18:20:14 , Law of Gravity, right?
00:18:20:14 , 00:18:22:09 , Guess what? There's no consensus on it!
00:18:22:09 , 00:18:24:29 , We've got a satellite up there right now, Gravity Probe B,
00:18:24:29 , 00:18:27:05 , testing our current understanding of gravity.
00:18:27:05 , 00:18:29:18 , And you know what it's looking for? I'll give you a hint:
00:18:29:18 , 00:18:32:03 , remember the phenomenon of "confirmation bias"?
00:18:32:03 , 00:18:33:27 , Scientists are really careful to avoid that,
00:18:33:27 , 00:18:36:30 , so the probe isn't so much looking for evidence to confirm the theory.
00:18:36:30 , 00:18:39:07 , It's looking for evidence to contradict it!
00:18:39:07 , 00:18:41:19 , We're actively trying to disprove perhaps the most
00:18:41:19 , 00:18:44:10 , widely accepted and beloved of all scientific theories.
00:18:44:10 , 00:18:45:05 , Why?
00:18:45:05 , 00:18:47:24 , Because we love it so much, we want to make it stronger.
00:18:47:24 , 00:18:52:05 , Looking really hard and conscientiously for contradictory evidence and failing to find it
00:18:52:05 , 00:18:56:18 , does more to increase our confidence than looking for supporting evidence and finding it.
00:18:56:18 , 00:18:58:12 , Science is never certain.
00:18:58:12 , 00:19:01:01 , You know that classic Mentos and Diet Coke reaction?
00:19:04:15 , 00:19:06:23 , You want to know the scientific explanation for it is?
00:19:06:23 , 00:19:09:05 , Why the Mentos make the Diet Coke go crazy?
00:19:09:05 , 00:19:10:00 , Here it is:
00:19:10:00 , 00:19:11:05 , No one knows!
00:19:11:05 , 00:19:15:02 , There's lots of conjecture—it's quite the hot topic in the chemistry education community.
00:19:15:02 , 00:19:16:19 , So you can find explanations,
00:19:16:19 , 00:19:19:26 , but the uncertainties associated with them are going to be very large.
00:19:19:26 , 00:19:22:23 , Why have we not studied it further to reduce those uncertainties?
00:19:22:23 , 00:19:24:11 , Because it's not worth it.
00:19:24:11 , 00:19:27:17 , But the more important the issue is, the more research goes into it,
00:19:27:17 , 00:19:29:23 , and the smaller the uncertainties become.
00:19:29:23 , 00:19:32:02 , But if you're waiting for there to be no dissent at all,
00:19:32:02 , 00:19:35:18 , then you'll wait forever, no matter what the scientific issue.
00:19:35:18 , 00:19:37:20 , It's sort of like with this whole climate change debate,
00:19:37:20 , 00:19:41:10 , it's easy to find websites giving all sorts of reasons to believe what I already believe.
00:19:41:10 , 00:19:43:07 , But that doesn't increase my confidence.
00:19:43:07 , 00:19:47:15 , I want my argument to be rock solid, so I go looking for websites that contradict what I believe.
00:19:47:15 , 00:19:51:26 , And when I can't find much that's credible, that increases my confidence in my views.
00:19:51:26 , 00:19:53:17 , It's like testing to see if something is watertight.
00:19:53:17 , 00:19:57:18 , You look for the leaks, and if you can't find any, then your confidence increases.
00:19:57:18 , 00:20:00:03 , It feels great to have everyone tell you you're right,
00:20:00:03 , 00:20:02:05 , but it's a deceptive, complacent game.
00:20:02:05 , 00:20:05:09 , The way to really get confident is to go poking at the other side,
00:20:05:09 , 00:20:08:08 , saying "what's your response to this? How would you contradict this?"
00:20:08:08 , 00:20:10:28 , I've done that quite a bit with my grid argument about global climate change,
00:20:10:28 , 00:20:14:16 , which is why there are so many bloody minutes of me talking on video as a result:
00:20:14:16 , 00:20:16:12 , the experience left me bruised and battered,
00:20:16:12 , 00:20:18:27 , but it left my argument that much stronger.
00:20:18:27 , 00:20:22:21 , In fact, as I film this, an early, faulty version of "How It All Ends"
00:20:22:21 , 00:20:25:27 , leaked onto Digg.com before I could remove it a couple days ago,
00:20:25:27 , 00:20:28:19 , and I'm heartened that every single criticism I read there
00:20:28:19 , 00:20:33:17 , was already anticipated and countered in my video scripts for these expansion pack videos.
00:20:33:17 , 00:20:36:17 , It's not because I'm smart, it's because I'm freaking thorough.
00:20:36:17 , 00:20:40:07 , And if ever there was an issue in human history that is worth being thorough about,
00:20:40:07 , 00:20:42:12 , wouldn't global climate change seem to be it?
00:20:42:12 , 00:20:46:01 , With the potential stakes being what they are, what else is more worth our time.
00:20:46:01 , 00:20:50:26 , Don't we deserve the best, most thorough, most self-critical deliberation on this?
00:20:50:26 , 00:20:51:29 , How about this objection:
00:20:51:29 , 00:20:55:07 , "Climate models are just models, just predictions about the future,
00:20:55:07 , 00:20:57:22 , which we can't test until the future actually happens.
00:20:57:22 , 00:20:59:16 , We don't know what's really going to happen.
00:20:59:16 , 00:21:03:02 , So they're just conjecture, and therefore useless."
00:21:03:02 , 00:21:05:23 , My response to this, which is a fairly common criticism, is:
00:21:05:23 , 00:21:07:25 , have you ever ridden on a modern airliner?
00:21:07:25 , 00:21:10:17 , Cuz they're all designed on the computer, modeled on the computer,
00:21:10:17 , 00:21:14:12 , tested on the computer model, then physical models, and finally computer models again,
00:21:14:12 , 00:21:16:23 , which is where the pilots actually learn to fly them.
00:21:16:23 , 00:21:18:30 , When the Boeing 777 was first flown,
00:21:18:30 , 00:21:21:27 , all the technicians, managers, and you can bet test pilots,
00:21:21:27 , 00:21:24:29 , were extremely confident that it would fly. Why?
00:21:24:29 , 00:21:26:29 , Because we've learned how to make good computer models,
00:21:26:29 , 00:21:31:03 , by tweaking them until their output matches what we see in the physical world.
00:21:31:03 , 00:21:32:30 , Climate models on the computer, for instance,
00:21:32:30 , 00:21:35:28 , are calibrated with the observed climate of the past.
00:21:35:28 , 00:21:38:13 , If we feed the model the conditions in 1950
00:21:38:13 , 00:21:41:15 , and it churns out predictions for the period 1950 to 2000
00:21:41:15 , 00:21:44:00 , that closely match what actually happened during that period,
00:21:44:00 , 00:21:46:22 , then that gives us increased confidence in the predictions it makes
00:21:46:22 , 00:21:50:13 , when we put in the conditions for 2000 and ask it about 2030.
00:21:50:13 , 00:21:53:28 , It's been proposed that the greatest knowledge is to know that you do not know.
00:21:53:28 , 00:21:56:30 , So when you hear pronouncements about how global climate change is bunk,
00:21:56:30 , 00:22:00:03 , or that we're not the ones doing it, keep that in mind.
00:22:00:03 , 00:22:03:13 , Now that you understand a bit about the uncertain and tentative nature of science,
00:22:03:13 , 00:22:07:08 , ask yourself: how credible are the pronouncements about a scientific issue,
00:22:07:08 , 00:22:09:03 , when they're made with such certainty?
00:22:10:01 , 00:22:12:27 , Along those lines, I was struck by how many people in the comments
00:22:12:27 , 00:22:16:12 , to my "Most Terrifying Video" made absolute statements of truth about the world,
00:22:16:12 , 00:22:18:27 , with absolutely no acknowledgement of uncertainty.
00:22:18:27 , 00:22:23:18 , A ton of people flat out said "Humans are not causing global warming, that's a fact."
00:22:23:18 , 00:22:25:12 , Other comments I got included:
00:22:25:12 , 00:22:27:26 , "Humans are too small to have an effect on the climate."
00:22:27:26 , 00:22:31:25 , "Global warming is a ploy for the elites to grow the government and take away your freedoms."
00:22:31:25 , 00:22:35:29 , "It is true that the climate is changing, but there's a lot of debate about whether we're the ones causing it."
00:22:35:29 , 00:22:37:25 , "Taking action may make things worse."
00:22:37:25 , 00:22:39:18 , "Climate changes all the time."
00:22:39:18 , 00:22:42:06 , "We're coming out of a cold cycle, so this is natural."
00:22:42:06 , 00:22:46:15 , "100 years of data is not enough to know 1000 years of past climate."
00:22:46:15 , 00:22:51:18 , "Personally, I don't think global warming is as definitely man–caused as popular media make it out to be."
00:22:51:18 , 00:22:52:20 , That's my favorite.
00:22:52:20 , 00:22:54:10 , "Personally, I think?"
00:22:54:10 , 00:22:56:28 , We're talking the most complex science in the history of humankind.
00:22:56:28 , 00:22:59:26 , Chaos theory was discovered studying weather systems.
00:22:59:26 , 00:23:01:14 , "Personally, I think?!"
00:23:01:14 , 00:23:04:15 , Who the heck are you to say what the physical truth is?
00:23:04:15 , 00:23:07:21 , But then, I admit, I fell into a similar mistake of being absolute,
00:23:07:21 , 00:23:10:24 , claiming in that video that "the only choice" is column A.
00:23:10:24 , 00:23:13:18 , Who the heck are we to think we've got a lock on truth?
00:23:13:18 , 00:23:16:24 , Have you ever been completely sure of something, and then turned out to be wrong?
00:23:16:24 , 00:23:19:29 , Shouldn't that temper our confidence the next time we feel that way?
00:23:19:29 , 00:23:22:04 , It should give you pause when the trained person
00:23:22:04 , 00:23:24:26 , is less certain of themselves than the untrained person.
00:23:24:26 , 00:23:27:04 , I was certainly humbled by the unexpected explosion
00:23:27:04 , 00:23:30:26 , in my classroom that I describe in the video "I Hope I'm Wrong".
00:23:30:26 , 00:23:32:28 , I guess the bottom line lesson here is that we will
00:23:32:28 , 00:23:36:28 , probably do better for ourselves and for the whole with some humility.
00:23:37:21 , 00:23:39:18 , Look, I don't have the answers.
00:23:39:18 , 00:23:41:14 , And neither, probably, do you.
00:23:41:14 , 00:23:45:23 , But we, as a people, as a species, can probably come up with something that's decent.
00:23:45:23 , 00:23:47:27 , Will it be right? Will it work?
00:23:47:27 , 00:23:49:07 , We can't know for sure.
00:23:49:07 , 00:23:52:01 , Will it be better than nothing? Probably.
00:23:52:01 , 00:23:55:04 , I forget where I read it—maybe it was even a bumper sticker LOL—
00:23:55:04 , 00:23:57:19 , but I recently came across a line that I think pretty well sums up
00:23:57:19 , 00:24:00:19 , the lesson in humility that scientific thinking teaches us.
00:24:00:19 , 00:24:02:21 , And I suspect it may help us make some headway in this
00:24:02:21 , 00:24:05:00 , whole discussion of what to do about climate change.
00:24:05:00 , 00:24:06:18 , It's just this:
00:24:06:18 , 00:24:09:10 , "Don't believe everything you think."
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.