• Jessica Colarossi

    Science Writer Twitter Profile

    Photo of Jessica Colarossi. A white woman with long, straight brown hair and wearing a black and green paisley blouse smiles and poses in front of a dark grey background.

    Jessica Colarossi is a science writer for The Brink. She graduated with a BS in journalism from Emerson College in 2016, with focuses on environmental studies and publishing. While a student, she interned at ThinkProgress in Washington, D.C., where she wrote over 30 stories, most of them relating to climate change, coral reefs, and women’s health. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 12 comments on How to Deal with Climate Skeptics at Thanksgiving Dinner

    1. I think that the title and subject matter were deliberately provocative for the purposes of getting readership – this is a common journalistic ploy.

      The key is to have an open mind, listen to and respect your family members, and not think that the world will end if you simply agree to disagree. We need a little more civil disagreement in the country.

    2. Yes that’s exactly what the article is suggesting .. listen to other folk’s opinions… No one is shoving anything down anyone’s throat. The article is thoughtfully written to avoid conflict and promote discussion of a very relevant , important topic. Have a happy thanksgiving!

  1. This is nonsensical arrogance at its finest.

    There was a time not too long ago when the consensus among physicians was that all men with Gleason 6 stage prostrate cancer should have their prostate removed. Science now views this pathology as indolent and men with it with are now advised to take no action and do watchful waiting. The men who were previously scared into thinking they should get treatment based on the prior consensus regret it but it is too late for them.

    The doctors who told those men they needed surgery based on a wrong interpretation of the data caused stress among their family members too. Those families urged their loved one take action too. But some men did not listen and they took a chance. And when they did not die as expected docs began to reassess the data. Soon the consensus changed.

    The point is scientific wisdom on any topic is constantly evolving. Exploiting non-scientists to convince people to take action on any issue is just plain wrong.

    This Thanksgiving do yourself and you family a favor and spend your time being thankful for your blessings and enjoying the company of your loved ones.

  2. Welcome to the nut house. You must be aware that more than 700 scientists have sent letters to EU parliament abt the fact that warming is much slower than previously thought. There is no climate crisis; and C02 is not a pollutant it is essential to life. Man-made global warming is, in fact, a hoax.

  3. What sort of nonsense article is this … ‘strategies for also brainwashing your closest family and friends at the holidays’ … I’m genuinely ashamed of my Alma mater.

    Listen first? Maybe just listen to others and then opt NOT to engage on a subject where you don’t see a lot of possibility for agreement – THIS is called life. Everyone won’t agree on sports teams .. the best vacations .. or even the wine or stuffing at the dinner table. Politics and religion are two subjects to stay out of – almost ALWAYS, as you’re not likely to change someone’s mind and they won’t change yours either!

    Bring on the science? So, now we all trust science? Like the media, sadly, the scientific community has also seen its reputation take a beating .. people are NOT trusting when they see that you’ve altered results, danced to the wishes of whoever is paying for the survey or study, and quite candidly watched as you’ve cried wolf for the better part of the last several decades! The ‘inconvenient truth’ is that there’s STILL an ice-cap a decade after Al Gore told us it’d be gone!

    Make it close to home. And you chose to use The Cape as your example? Please explain why the great and powerful Obama decided to drop $15m on oceanfront property if it’s all going away SOON? The raw hypocrisy is exactly what the sceptic sees .. and sometime you’d be better off just walking away. And also, please explain away the article appearing just yesterday in the WSJ or NYT (it may have been Bloomberg) on how China will be badly missing its pollution targets as its re-upped its coal commitments. We’re giving up things here while China belches more and more carbon into the atmosphere .. it makes NO sense.

    Eat your turkey .. enjoy the pie .. put the stupid electronic devices away and spend time actually speaking to your grandparents as they WON’T live forever .. laugh .. laugh again and again .. enjoy the time with your family and friends and leave all the silly ‘social justice’ at home (or at least in the car).

    Let it go!

    (This is types on one of those stupid electronic devices, so please excuse any typos)

  4. The only way for change to occur in this greedy world is through innovation that will create wealth for someone, otherwise dumb humans will do down with the ship the same way drug addicted monkeys in a cage, who are offered a choice of food or cocaine, will keep pulling the lever for more cocaine until they are dead.

  5. The only provocative and nonsensical issues are with the responses from people who are having Thanksgiving with animals. This is a very well written article that emphasizes being open to other peoples view which the respondents are not capable of, obviously.

  6. Like all “communications experts,” they are pushing a message on behalf of the patrons or in support of their own worldview. Unfortunately, the 97% consensus has been debunked by those who have undertaken the effort to study the origin and methodology of the number which seems to be repeated everywhere.

    Not one research can demonstrate, without flawed computer models and dodgy homogenized data, how man’s contributory signal to climate change can be identified, quantified, and measured against the noise of natural climate variability over geologic time scales.

    Or how nobody is mentioning the artificiality or intellectual dishonesty of grafting real-world measurements onto a proxy-derived dataset because the end of the proxy dataset does not support the hypothesis when it comes to the now-debunked Michael Mann “hockey stick.”

    The problem is that most people will not take the time and effort to study a subject and then substitute their beliefs, feelings, and peer-derived opinions for rigorous logic.

    It is best to shut up and enjoy the food.

  7. The 97 percent is completely wrong. Many and maybe all reviews of the data show that it lays way below (varies between 1.6 percent to 82 percent). Claiming that 97 percent has a consensus on human involvement is complete bs and quoted from an research from Sceptical Scientist.

  8. Not only are the doom and gloomers telling you how to speak to somebody regarding this hoax…..now they are telling us to not eat meat and give up our cars. Have you ever noticed that half these goofs who want to stop using natural gas live in California. Come spend winter in Chicago and you will buy stock in gas and oil stocks.lf this happens global warming is true then keep it coming. 60 degrees on Xmas is ok with me

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *