by Dennis Ambler
Those of who have long been in denial about the realities of global warming and the credibility of the IPCC, can now feel relieved, there may be hope for us yet. The diagnosis has been made; we have a psychological problem, which so far has failed to respond to the millions upon millions of dollars spent in “communicating” climate change to the masses.
However, the process of our redemption is already underway: A new publication called “Communicating climate change to mass public audiences” has just been presented to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, by the “Climate Change Communication Advisory Group”.
(Yes, the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining.)
What is the Climate Change Communication Advisory Group – This UK group is a project of the Public Interest Research Centre, an “independent” group who are partially financed by the UK government’s Economic and Social Research Council. CCCAG is university based, with five psychology departments involved, including the US and also has WWF-UK as a member.
Communicating climate change to mass public audiences Working Document, September 2010
“This short advisory paper collates a set of recommendations about how best to shape mass public communications aimed at increasing concern about climate change and motivating commensurate behavioural changes.
“Its focus is not upon motivating small private-sphere behavioural changes on a piece-meal basis. Rather, it marshals evidence about how best to motivate the ambitious and systemic behavioural change that is necessary – including, crucially, greater public engagement with the policy process (through, for example, lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations), as well as major lifestyle changes.”
The first claims to exploring the psychology of “climate change denial” came from the University of the West of England last year.
Conference – Facing Climate Change, Climate Change Denial
University of the West of England, 7 March 2009
“Man-made climate change poses an unprecedented threat to the global ecosystem and yet the response, from national policy makers right through to individual consumers, remains tragically inadequate. The Centre for Psycho-Social Studies at the University of the West of England is organising a major interdisciplinary event Facing Climate Change on this topic at UWE on 7 March 2009.
Facing Climate Change is the first national conference to specifically explore ‘climate change denial’.
This conference aims to strengthen our awareness of the challenge facing us and to enhance our capacity for effective decision-making and action. It will do this by bringing together a group of people – climate change activists, eco-psychologists, psychotherapists and social researchers – who are uniquely qualified to assess the human dimensions of this human-made problem.
Professor Paul Hoggett is helping to organise the conference, he said, “We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”
Read the entire essay here (PDF)
Those of who have long been in denial about the realities of global warming and the credibility of the IPCC, can now feel relieved, there may be hope for us yet. The diagnosis has been made; we have a psychological problem, which so far has failed to respond to the millions upon millions of dollars spent in “communicating” climate change to the masses.
However, the process of our redemption is already underway: A new publication called “Communicating climate change to mass public audiences” has just been presented to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, by the “Climate Change Communication Advisory Group”.
(Yes, the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining.)
What is the Climate Change Communication Advisory Group – This UK group is a project of the Public Interest Research Centre, an “independent” group who are partially financed by the UK government’s Economic and Social Research Council. CCCAG is university based, with five psychology departments involved, including the US and also has WWF-UK as a member.
Communicating climate change to mass public audiences Working Document, September 2010
“This short advisory paper collates a set of recommendations about how best to shape mass public communications aimed at increasing concern about climate change and motivating commensurate behavioural changes.
“Its focus is not upon motivating small private-sphere behavioural changes on a piece-meal basis. Rather, it marshals evidence about how best to motivate the ambitious and systemic behavioural change that is necessary – including, crucially, greater public engagement with the policy process (through, for example, lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations), as well as major lifestyle changes.”
The first claims to exploring the psychology of “climate change denial” came from the University of the West of England last year.
George Orwell would be proud.
O/T but Just been sent this link
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/09/say-goodbye-to-sunspots.html
“Scientists studying sunspots for the past 2 decades have concluded that the magnetic field that triggers their formation has been steadily declining. If the current trend continues, by 2016 the sun’s face may become spotless and remain that way for decades—a phenomenon that in the 17th century coincided with a prolonged period of cooling on Earth.”
John.
“. . . as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”
Yeah, that’s my problem. Now that I know the diagnosis, hopefully I will soon be back on the road to spending my days wringing my hands over the impending doom caused by climate change — back on the road to recovery, yeah, that’s it.
More bullshit baffles brains – except it doesn’t! They’ve already lost…
Farenheit 451 coming soon?
Perhaps re-education camps will be next.
Nice to see my taxes being put to good use.
Just to show that climate craziness is not limited to the other side of the pond, this morning I received the following announcement from AAAS announcing a panel (to include our friend Gavin from NASA/GISS) on “Overcoming Skepticism after Climategate”:
“Dear Member,
This fall, AAAS is launching MemberCentral, an exclusive website for AAAS members. MemberCentral is dedicated to highlighting AAAS activities and fostering community among our members. To support these goals, the site will feature original content presented as webinars, videos, podcasts, blogs, and more.
On September 27, 2010, at 12:00 p.m. ET, AAAS MemberCentral is conducting its first webinar: “Climate Change and the Public: Overcoming Skepticism After Climategate.”
Featuring panelists Gavin Schmidt, Ph.D., of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS); Edward Maibach, M.P.H., Ph.D., of George Mason University ; Brenda Ekwurzel, Ph.D., from the Union of Concerned Scientists; and author and science journalist Chris Mooney, this discussion will explore ways the scientific community can combat negative public attitudes toward climate change. Panelists will share their best practices for public and media engagement, debate how to respond to critiques, and explore the idea of reframing climate change as a public health issue. ”
Love the part about “reframing climate change as a public health issue”–we have gone from global warming to climate change to toxic climate.
There are 2 scary things here:
1) The gov funds a private entity to produce propaganda (so it won’t get caught doing it).
2) Stalin and his ilk also used “psychologists” to label dissidents as mentally ill.
Never occurs to these chaps that the ordinary citizen is not so stupid.
“This conference aims to strengthen our awareness of the challenge facing us and to enhance our capacity for effective decision-making and action. It will do this by bringing together a group of people – climate change activists, eco-psychologists, psychotherapists and social researchers – who are uniquely qualified to assess the human dimensions of this human-made problem.”
Thank goodness normal people are not being forced to attend.
Guess who pays for this garbage?
“the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining”
Ah yes, John Selwyn Gummer. For an encore, he force fed burgers to his children on national TV to prove beef was safe to eat during the BSE scare.
Maybe we are “thinking the wrong thoughts”, but we are feeling the right feelings; instead of pessimism, depression, doom, and despair, we seek creativity, joy, abundance, and freedom.
The West spent a thousand years practicing repentance for imagined sins, until the Enlightenment made real earthy optimism and progress.
Whatever the climate does, optimism and change are to be welcomed. They are our only hope.
Feeling despair? Feeling lack? Feeling like you need to conserve your weak energies?
Choose creativity. Choose excitement. Choose hope.
“(Yes, the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining.)”
I remember him. As I recall, he was translated from the post of Sports Minister. He had better luck with the weather than he did with football though.
“We will examine denial from a variety of different perspectives – as the product of addiction to consumption, as the outcome of diffusion of responsibility and the idea that someone else will sort it out and as the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility.”
So they won’t be examning ‘denial’ from the perspective of it being the product of people looking at the science and discovering the theory of man made global warming is a crock then?
Criminy! That couple para’s in italics is downright spooky! Didn’t Stalin say something like this just before he shipped all those folks off to the Gulag?
ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh this is so channeling Joseph Geobbels
It reminds me of the days of the Soviet Union where people were sent to insane asylums because they did not accept Scientific Socialism.
After all why would anyone reject a socialist paradise?
They clearly must be mad and in need of psychiatric help.
The Ministry of Truth
(re. George Orwell, “1984”)
What did we ever do to deserve these clowns?
Propaganda that promotes group-think is an egregious affront to freedom. Not far behind such an endeavor are the laws that will impose this on you. This pamphlet should be snapped up by any and all independent minded citizenry and burned in the town square.
tallbloke,
No, no, no, it was Labour’s Denis Howell, amiable old duffer and ex-football ref.
Oh dear the veritable propaganda unit!!
“This conference aims to strengthen our awareness of the challenge facing us and to enhance our capacity for effective decision-making and action. It will do this by bringing together a group of people – climate change activists, eco-psychologists, psychotherapists and social researchers – who are uniquely qualified to assess the human dimensions of this human-made problem.”
They are going to work very hard to convince my fully qualified Psychologist son, as he certainly has their measure – eco-psychologists!! what next. Guess the best way to deal with them is laughter. Josh you should have fun with the next round of cartoons for these characters. Shades of Monty Python……
The Minister for Drought was Dennis Howell, a Labour politician. Which makes sense really as there was a Labour government at the time. Selwyn Gummer is a Conservative.
Even though he’s rated very highly, after reading this I’m thinking George Orwell is not rated highly enough.
“…motivate the ambitious and systemic behavioural change…”
What they seek to do to people, they first do to language. When you read such words, you know you are dealing with misanthropes.
“tallbloke says:
September 16, 2010 at 8:00 am
“the UK does have a Minister for Climate Change, however, in 1976, there was actually a Minister for Drought, who was one of the most effective politicians in history, because within three days of his appointment, it had started raining”
Ah yes, John Selwyn Gummer. For an encore, he force fed burgers to his children on national TV to prove beef was safe to eat during the BSE scare.” Yup, he did, but have any of his children died of CJD? I don’t think so. Not sure what your point was?
Anyway, as one of those “decision-makers” I am inundated by invitations to seminars, training and any other kind of brain-washing you could imagine to make sure I start thinking the “right” way. The bombardment is pretty relentless and it worries me that I see other decision makers falling for it all which makes it harder and harder to resist unless you are a committed Climate Audit, WUWT, Bishop Hill et al reader.
Flooding is the worry word down my way – it doesn’t seem to be so much about extreme heat in this part of the south-west of the UK – and there all sorts of training courses on how to help avoid flooding in the future. There don’t seem to be many comments about not building on floodplains, probably because they’ve already covered them with buildings, and now any flooding that does occur is obviously because of climate change. Seems like a big scam to me to stop those poor souls in house on floodplains from pointing the finger at government and councils and holding them liable for permitting development there. Is that they mean by “the consequence of living in a perverse culture which encourages collusion, complacency, irresponsibility”?
Perhaps I’ve got that the wrong way round………………………..