Viewpoint: Twisting the facts on climate change

If your planet were in danger, wouldn’t you want to know?

Two recent examples suggest that scientific misinformation abounds in this country. A recent open letter sent to the government says the Canadian government is muzzling its scientists, especially on issues involving the environment.

Similarly, a report released at the end of February says a Carleton University professor mislead his students about climate change science.

Canadians are getting a muddled message about how our environment is changing.

The majority of the scientific body of evidence in this area shows the planet’s climate is warming because of human damage to the environment. Why, then, are Canadians still receiving politically spun information – or none at all – about global warming?

The open letter by the Canadian Science Writers’ Association asks Prime Minister Stephen Harper to unmuzzle government scientists and let them speak to the media about their research.

The letter cites the recent examples of two federal scientists barred from speaking to the media about ozone layer research and a study on salmon decline in British Columbia, respectively.

Researchers and commentators discussing this case suggested that controlling the spread of the data in these studies was an effort by the government to supress evidence that shows how serious climate change really is.

This type of message control by our policy makers, driven by political motivations, has terrifying implications about decision-making in this country.

The other case that hit the newspapers this month concerns a professor at Carleton University who taught students climate change science that fundamentally ignored the majority of the evidence.

An elective course taught by Prof. Tom Harris entitled Climate Change: An Earth Sciences Perspective, taught that climate change presents no threat to humans or the Earth, according to a study of the material conducted by four Carleton University professors.

Harris dismissed the report as unfair, saying the reviewers were unqualified to critique his course because they are biologists.

He also said he didn’t deny any claims about climate change, he simply presented alternative views about the phenomenon’s origins.

Nonetheless, this course clearly supported a view that represents a tiny proportion of the evidence. Failing to place the course’s alternative perspective within context of the larger body of scientific research is plain and simply misinforming students.

There is a place for alternative perspectives in universities, where academic freedom is key. But in science, evidence trumps argument every time. Say it as many times as you like, the earth was never at the centre of the universe.

Harris needs to step away from his political leanings and consider the impact of his discourse on the students whose views he’s shaping.

Canadians need to start receiving clear messages about the scientific evidence supporting climate change that moves beyond the “is it real or not” debate.

Twisting the facts on climate change breeds public misunderstanding. It’s a subversion of democracy and could prove disastrous for the planet.