NPR has a nice article on a climate science “skeptic”. She’s skeptical in the same way that I’m skeptical: there cannot possibly be a scientific consensus because the error bars are just way too big (not only the error bars on what’s happening but also the error bars on the causes). Judith Curry deserves a big, wholehearted YES.

NPR, however, even though the article is generally quite good, deserves a big NO because of the concluding paragraph:

But leaving climate change actions to individuals will not solve the problem. You can’t affect global warming simply by buying a Prius and adjusting the thermostat. And there’s no uncertainty about that.

Did they not just read this article that they wrote? Or maybe they just completely disagree with it. Because if they read their own article, then they would know doing nothing or doing anything (including “simply” buying a Prius and adjusting the thermostat) might both have the same impact on climate change because nobody really knows what does have an impact on climate change.

-JD Cross