Dear Editor:

Science deniers are quick to jump on the idea that there is no such thing as scientific consensus. I would be most interested in reading peer reviewed papers that contest the theory of gravitational attraction or the sun centered solar system. If it is true that there is no such thing as scientific consensus, there must be some out there.

Yes, there are a few scientists who may be skeptical about some of the nuances of climate change but insisting that there is no consensus is an example of setting impossible standards to rationalize science denial.

It may interest our readers to know that among the thousands of research papers on climate change, there are also many meta-studies, or studies of studies of the peer reviewed research. One of the more recent meta-studies was done by Mark Lynas, et. al. published in the Journal Environmental Research Letters dated November 2021, entitled “Greater Than 99% Consensus on Human Caused Climate Change in the Peer-Reviewed Scientific Literature.” The researchers reviewed 3,000 randomly selected peer reviewed research papers out of a dataset of over 88,000 climate related papers. Their findings were that only a small handful of papers expressed some skepticism of human caused global warming.

But let’s try a little thought experiment. Let us say that there are a handful of scientists who are skeptical about the existence of gravity. Based on this hypothetical lack of consensus, would you jump off a cliff and expect to float? I think not, but this is what science deniers are trying to persuade us to do.

I know that for the science deniers, there will be no changing their minds, they are too heavily invested in their opinions to be swayed by facts. So it is not for them that I present these research papers.

In science, we need to be skeptical, not gullible to the fossil fuel industry’s propaganda campaign. Opinion and rhetoric is not the same as evidence that points to cold hard facts. Let’s be more skeptical.

Fred W. Nehring

Boothbay