#19) ANALYSIS: WHY MARC MORANO IS SUCH A GOOD COMMUNICATOR | The Benshi

THE TOP TEN WAYS IN WHICH MARC MORANO ILLUSTRATES THE PRINCIPLES OF “DON’T BE SUCH A SCIENTIST”

1 SPECIFICS – I mentioned in my book the basic rule that, “The power of good storytelling rests in the specifics.” For Benshi Essay #3 I delved deeper into this, citing the wonderful article by Nicholas Kristof in Outside Magazine about the failure of NGOs in Africa to grasp this principle in their mass communication. Now we have Marc Morano as a perfect case study in what this means. Just listen to him in his television debates — everything he says is tied to specific pieces of information. And notice that I titled the interview with him, “Naming Names.” He simply knows how to argue in very specific terms. [Morano knows what he's talking about, and the facts are on his side.]  We can (and will) argue about the accuracy of it all down the road, but for now, know that this is a characteristic of a skilled communicator.

IPCC reviewers pointed out wildfire mistake, ignored by authors « ClimateQuotes.com

Gold standard? More like Plushenko platinum.

Growing low-oxygen zones in oceans worry [junk] scientists - Yahoo! News

"It is consistent with models of global warming, but the time frame is too short to know whether it is a trend or a weather phenomenon," Johnson said.

Keeping Parliament’s Climategate enquiry straight | The SPPI Blog

From Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christensen

* The Science and Technology Committee of the UK Parliament recently held a hearing on the reliability of climatological data and results in the aftermath of Climategate. Here is an informed commentary on that hearing.

Help! How do I know? « JoNova

A transparent, competitive system where all views are welcome is the fastest way to advance humanity. The Royal Society is the oldest scientific association in the world. Its motto is essentially, Take No One’s Word For It. In other words, assume nothing; look at the data. When results come in that don’t fit the theory, a scientist chucks out his theory. A non-scientist has “faith”, he “believes” or assumes his theory is right, and tries to make the measurements fit. When measurements disagree, he ignores the awkward news, and “corrects”, or statistically alters, the data–always in the direction that keeps his theory alive.