Do public narratives reflect the science?
This chapter talks about the scientific papers and research programmes that had identified two degrees as a dangerous limit and found no evidence of science having discovered a two degree dangerous limit. Climate science provides the majority of the data and knowledge informing climate change discourse. The extent to which discussions of dangerous limits within the climate science community have been constrained or defined by external social norms is difficult to assess. The IPCC collates, interprets and disseminates peer-reviewed climate science, and its own peer-review panel comprises, in part at least, climate scientists. The explanation of two degrees as an aid to communication did not make it into the media reports analysed for the research. Reason for doubting the communicative value of the two degree symbol is simply that, in the UK press at least, it simply is not used very much at all.