Presented by: Roger M. Cooke

The scientific debate on the need for climate action is over, yet science is losing the public debate. Apparently the climate science communicators are doing something very wrong. Fabrication of facts, scriptural snake oil, gerrymandered proof burdens, bloated overconfidence and outright lies – these are among the miasmas fouling the public debate about climate change. It is not surprising that interest groups try these stratagems, the surprise is that they are successful. A snarly cognitive illusion called the Confidence Trap prevents us from dealing rationally with climate uncertainties (a cognitive illusion is like an optical illusion involving the brain instead of the eyes). After a ‘syllabus of errors’, this talk focuses on better ways to capture and incorporate expert’s judgments on climate change. Structured expert judgment was developed in risk analysis and has seen a wide range of applications from nuclear safety, public health, investment banking to policy analysis and natural hazards. It has recently entered the climate debate in earnest. Can it help? It’s time to find out.

Free attendance

There will be a reception after the lecture

Main contact point: leonardo.rolla@warwick.ac.uk

Downloads: 2022-006-08-roger-m-cooke.pdfLink opens in a new window