Naomi Oreskes Quotes & Sayings

Why would scientists dedicated to uncovering the truth about the natural world deliberately misrepresent the work of their own colleagues? Why would they spread accusations with no basis? Why would they refuse to correct their arguments once they had been shown to be incorrect? And why did the press continue to quote them, year after year, even as their claims were shown, one after another, to be false? — Naomi Oreskes

Yet again, unscientific claims were being circulated broadly, but the scientists' refutation of them was published where only fellow scientists would see it. — Naomi Oreskes

What to do about climate change is political, it's social, and it's moral, which is one of the reasons the scientific community reached out to the Pope, to ask for his involvement in this issue. — Naomi Oreskes

As an independent source of authority and knowledge, science has always had the capacity to challenge ruling powers' ability to control people by controlling their beliefs. Indeed, it has the power to challenge anyone who wishes to preserve, protect, or defend the status quo. — Naomi Oreskes

It really is a very radical call ... to reject materialism as our central value and to think about the sanctity of life and what that really means if we take it seriously. — Naomi Oreskes

Many people have the impression that there is significant scientific disagreement about global climate change. It's time to lay that misapprehension to rest. There is a scientific consensus on the fact that Earth's climate is heating up and human activities are part of the reason. We need to stop repeating nonsense about the uncertainty of global warming and start talking seriously about the right approach to address it. — Naomi Oreskes

We don't survive without plants and animals because we rely on them, we rely on plants to put oxygen into the atmosphere, we rely on ... fish and crops and cows to eat. — Naomi Oreskes

Scientists should continue doing what they've always done, which is to understand the Earth as well as they can. — Naomi Oreskes

I think it is important for people to understand that there are real serious economic costs and real serious economic damages associated with inaction on climate change. — Naomi Oreskes

A similar phenomenon developed with acid rain in the 1990s, as the media attended to the idea that its cause was still not established - more than a decade after that was no longer true - or the claim that it would cost more to fix than it was worth, which was unsupported by evidence. — Naomi Oreskes

The philosopher Isaiah Berlin sagely pointed out, liberty for wolves means death to lambs.124 — Naomi Oreskes

The same mentality that leads to environmental despoliation, environmental destruction, also leads to damage to people. — Naomi Oreskes

Most people have thought of ... climate change as a problem about the environment that is separate and distinct from problems of human wellbeing. — Naomi Oreskes

A third of all Americans think that Saddam Hussein was behind the attacks on September 11.3 Nearly a quarter still think that there's no solid evidence that smoking kills.4 And as recently as 2007, 40 percent of Americans believed that scientific experts were still arguing about the reality of global warming.5 — Naomi Oreskes

I think Pope Francis is our Pope Francis. I mean, the point of him is that he's a global leader, and he's trying, I think he's embracing that role. — Naomi Oreskes

Scientific monitoring is going to be terrifically important, because whatever steps we take ... we will have to monitor those steps in order to know if they're actually working. — Naomi Oreskes

The billionaire investor George Soros has coined a term to describe this perspective: "free market fundamentalism." It is the belief not simply that free markets are the best way to run an economic system, but that free markets are the only way that will not ultimately destroy our other freedoms. "The doctrine of laissez-faire capitalism holds that the common good is best served by the uninhibited pursuit of self-interest,"36 Soros wrote. — Naomi Oreskes

The industry had realized you could create the impression of controversy simply by asking questions — Naomi Oreskes

When we damage the environment, we damage everything we depend on. — Naomi Oreskes

When God made the planet, he made the plants, he made the animals, he made the Sun and the Moon, and he made us, and we're all interconnected, and when we disregard, disrespect, or damage any part of it, we do violence against creation. — Naomi Oreskes

There's real economic costs to climate change - So, Superstorm Sandy led to billions of dollars in damages. The fires out in the west, 70 million dollars a day are being spent in fighting fires that have clearly been exacerbated by drought and climate change. So, people have pointed out the true dollars and cents cost of inaction on climate change. — Naomi Oreskes

Scientists are scientists. They're not really in a position to speak clearly on the moral dimensions, and they're not really comfortable doing that. — Naomi Oreskes

The IPCC explicitly addressed - and rejected - the Marshall Institute argument for blaming the Sun. The upper limits on solar variability, they explained, are "small compared with greenhouse forcing and even if such a change occurred over the next few decades, it would be swamped by the enhanced greenhouse effect."75 — Naomi Oreskes

Did all of Singer's efforts to discredit mainstream science matter? When asked in 1995 where he got his assessments of ozone depletion, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, probably the most powerful man in Congress at the time, said, "my assessment is from reading people like Fred Singer."93 — Naomi Oreskes

It's extremely hard to know what the economic consequences of any decision will be. And I'm not a, a, a financial analyst, so I, I generally don't try to make some kind of prediction about that. — Naomi Oreskes

Scientists have been saying, for an awfully long time, that we're all interconnected. Scientists would use the word 'ecosystem' to express that idea. Obviously, people can't survive without air and water, and we rely on plants and animals for food, and plants and animals rely on us to preserve their habitats. — Naomi Oreskes

At a recent conference, a colleague told one of us that in IPCC discussions, some scientists have been reluctant to make strong claims about the scientific evidence, lest contrarians "attack us". Another said that she'd rather err on the side of conservatism in her estimates, because then she feels more "secure." — Naomi Oreskes