This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Spiffy sperry (talk | contribs) at 18:52, 28 July 2006 (→Global warming: change italics to quote). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:52, 28 July 2006 by Spiffy sperry (talk | contribs) (→Global warming: change italics to quote)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Naomi Oreskes is an Associate Professor, History Department and Program in Science Studies at the University of California San Diego. She has been at UC San Diego since 1998.
Background
Oreskes received her Bachelor of Science in Mining Geology from The Royal School of Mines Imperial College University of London in 1981, and worked as a Research Assistant in the Geology Department and as a Teaching Assistant in the departments of Geology, Philosophy and Applied Earth Sciences at Stanford University starting in 1984. She received her PhD in the Graduate Special Program in Geological Research and History of Science at Stanford in 1990. She was the 1994 recipient of the NSF Young Investigator Award.
She has worked as a consultant for the EPA and NAS, and has also taught at Dartmouth, Harvard and NYU. She is also a member of the History of Science Society. She is the author or has contributed to a number of essays and technical reports in economic geology and science history in addition to three books:
- Plate Tectonics: An Insider’s History of the Modern Theory of the Earth, Edited with Homer Le Grand) (2003) Westview Press, ISBN 0813341329
- The Rejection of Continental Drift: Theory and Method in American Earth Science (1999) Oxford University Press, ISBN 0195117336
- Perspectives on Geophysics, Special Issue of Studies in the History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 31B, Oreskes, Naomi and James R. Fleming, eds. 2000.
Global warming
Dr. Oreskes wrote an essay on science and society BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change in the American Association for the Advancement of Science's Science Magazine in 2004.
In the essay she reported analyses of "928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003" and concluded that 75 per cent of them either explicitly or implicitly backed the consensus view, while none directly dissented from it.
Her conclusions have been challenged by Benny Peiser and Richard Lindzen. The debate is covered in more detail at Scientific opinion on climate change.