EPISODE THREE

WHEREIN Crab misunderstands skepticism

Crab: Albatross, Bulldog seems to be angry at me. He is a premier scientist in the animal kingdom, why is he angry with me for trying to do my own science?

Albatross: Oh, you are working in science, now?

Crab: Yes. I am a climate skeptic. I am using my critical thinking skills to assess and repudiate the claims of climate change.

Albatross: I don’t think that’s quite what skepticism is. Or critical thinking. Actually, you’re probably participating in groupthink instead.

Crab: What do you mean? I have it here in my smartphone - skepticism means doubt.

Albatross: Of course, but if you want to be a climate skeptic, you should look at climate change in terms of scientific skepticism.

Crab: Sir, I am certainly scientific! That is an uncalled-for ad hominem attack against my good self!

Albatross: No offense meant, of course, pardon me. But I do think if you wish to scientifically criticize climate change, you ought look at the issue from more than a singular perspective, perhaps, rather than just attempting to prove the science as a whole to be somehow “wrong.”

Crab: Ah, what are you saying? The majority of the scientists in the animal kingdom support climate change-

Albatross: No, no, we don’t SUPPORT climate change, we actually rather oppose it. At least insofar as climate change is unhealthy for our future-

Crab: Very well, whatever. Climate studies are clearly biased, based on the numbers. Why should I consider opposing opinions if there are so many other animals doing precisely that? That’s the true group thinking, by my count.

Albatross: Pardon me, sir. I think I’ll find myself a tasty herring for dinner.

Home

Apologies to Crustaceans whose Research has been Inappropriately Cited