Canada-wide Survey of Canadian Scientiests: A Preliminary Report on the State of the Discipline, the Fossil Fuel Industries and Environmental Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey of Canadian earth scientists has yielded important information concerning their attitudes in four key areas relevant to the future of geoscience in Canada. First, most respondents agree that traditional geology departments in Canada are shifting their primary focus from the science of exploration and extraction of resources to environmental science and environmental remediation. Second, a majority believe that fossil fuel industries are perceived by the general public as contributors to global warming. Notably, most respondents also support the implementation of programs to mitigate the effects of these emissions. Third, in terms of the relevance of earth science to the study of climate change, although a majority responded that climate change, over the last few decades, has been driven by a combination of natural and anthropogenic processes, most also agreed that explanations for this climate change have not adequately taken paleoclimate data into consideration. Finally, in terms of the role of science and advocacy in informing public policy, a significant majority of respondents felt that public understandings and media representations of climate change are not based on good scientific knowledge and that politicians are more influenced by public opinion than science. Most respondents felt that earth scientists need to become more active in speaking out about social problems and their solutions. An agenda for change should include the development of public position statements on issues of national importance, and a public education campaign about the work of the geoscience community. SOMMAIRE Une enquete d'opinion menee aupres des geoscientifiques canadiens a mis au jour des informations significatives sur leurs attitudes quant a l'avenir des geosciences au Canada. Premierement, la plupart des repondants se sont dit d'avis que les centres d'interets des departements de geologie au Canada changeaient des sciences de l'exploration et de l'extraction des ressources vers les sciences de l'environnement et les sciences de restauration de l'environnement. Deuxiemement, une majorite ont dit croire que les industries des energies fossiles sont percues par le public en general, comme facteurs du rechauffement planetaire. On notera aussi, que la plupart ont dit soutenir la mise en œuvre de programmes d'attenuation des effets des emissions dont elles sont responsables. Troisiemement, quant a l'interet des geosciences dans l'etude des changements climatiques, bien qu'une majorite se soit montres d'accord, que les changements climatiques des dernieres decennies aient ete causes par une combinaison de processus naturels et anthropogeniques, la plupart ont consideres que les explications n'avaient pas suffisamment tenu compte des donnees paleoclimatiques. Finalement, en ce qui a trait a la science et a son devoir d'information et de soutien des politiques publiques, une importante majorite des repondants ont estime qu'en matiere de changements climatiques, la comprehension du public et la representation qu'en donne les medias ne reposent pas sur des connaissances scientifiques de qualite, et que les politiciens sont davantage influences par l'opinion publique que par la science. La plupart des repondants ont estime que les geoscientifiques devaient s'investir davantage dans les debats et faire entendre leur voix sur les problemes sociaux et leurs solutions. Toute initiative de changement doit comprendre un volet d'elaboration de prise de position publique sur les questions d'interet nationale, ainsi qu'une campagne d'education du public sur le travail de la communaute geoscientifique.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".