From CNSNews.com – Proponents of human-caused global warming claim that “cognitive” brain function prevents conservatives from accepting the science that says “climate change” is an imminent threat to planet Earth and its inhabitants.
George Lakoff, a professor of cognitive science and linguistics at the University of California-Berkeley and author of the book “The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist’s Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics,” says his scientific research shows that how one perceives the world depends on one’s bodily experience and how one functions in the everyday world. Reason is shaped by the body, he says.
Lakoff told CNSNews.com that “metaphors” shape a person’s understanding of the world, along with one’s values and political beliefs — including what they think about global warming.
“It relates directly (to global warming) because conservatives tend to feel that the free market should be unregulated and (that) environmental regulations are immoral and wrong,” Lakoff said.
“And what they try to do is show that the science is wrong and that the argument is wrong, based on the science. So when it comes back to science, they try to debunk the science,” Lakoff said.
On the other hand, he added, liberals’ cognitive process allows them to be “open-minded.”
“Liberals say, ‘Look seriously at the science and look at whether people are going to be harmed or not and whether the world is going to be harmed,’” Lakoff said.
In a Feb. 23 report on National Public Radio, reporter Christopher Joyce began his story by stating that recent polls show that fewer Americans believe humans are making the planet dangerously warmer, despite “a raft” of contradictory reports.
“This puzzles many climate scientists, but not social scientists, whose research suggests that facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs,” Joyce said.
…
Read the entire piece here
=======================
The explanations are getting desperate. I wonder then how Dr. Lakoff explains people like myself, who once accepted the scientific arguments presented on global warming, but who now reject most of the hype and urgency attached to it? Believe it or not, in the early 90’s I used to be a global warming activist. But that’s another story.
Wren (13:15:23) :
As for the CRU hack, the police still are investigating the case, so we don’t yet know exactly what happened.
However, it may be theft.
I am wary of people who use things that may have been stolen. I don’t trust people who use things that have been stolen. If someone gives tacit approval to theft by using what’s stolen, I suspect that person also will think it’s OK to lie.
Bait and switch. You’re positing a possibility and then treating that possibility as an actuality to further your point.
The police admit the e-mails were on an open server. Something placed on an open server is, ipsa res loquitur, placed there for people to read or download.
Since, as Dr. Lakoff claims, “reason is shaped by the body,” it suggests to me that liberals must have a temperature perception inhibition which allows them to perceive global warming even when their toes are freezing off.
Wren
“Yeah, well Lindzen doesn’t believe second-hand smoke is harmful to babies, so I would take anything he says with a grain of salt.”
Are you going to reference the published epidemiological studies that show that it is? I’m all ears. (Actual direct link epidemiology, not inductive serial assumption statistical nonsense that is just as idiotic as C-AGW.) The dose is the toxin. If you dont understand this statement, you are at least as ignorant of epidemiology as you are of climate.
Lindzen is a real scientist with courage to challenge politically-driven pseudo-science myths. You appear to be a serial band-wagon jumper with no scientific instinct.
Bill Tuttle (06:28:42) :
Wren (13:15:23) :
As for the CRU hack, the police still are investigating the case, so we don’t yet know exactly what happened.
However, it may be theft.
I am wary of people who use things that may have been stolen. I don’t trust people who use things that have been stolen. If someone gives tacit approval to theft by using what’s stolen, I suspect that person also will think it’s OK to lie.
Bait and switch. You’re positing a possibility and then treating that possibility as an actuality to further your point.
The police admit the e-mails were on an open server. Something placed on an open server is, ipsa res loquitur, placed there for people to read or download.
====
I know that was a theory, but I didn’t know the police had concluded there was no crime and stopped investigating. What’s your source?
If they have, I have to wonder why no one has stepped forward and said “I did it, and it’s no crime.”
Skepticism is a form of self preservation, the will to survive, a defense mechanism, it is a trait common in all animals. An example would be a domesticated feline that will not allow itself to be approached by a stranger, even if friendly. (However once the stranger feeds the cat, this will usually change). Natural selection predicts that species lacking healthy skepticism will not survive, and its appearance is the true anomaly. It’s resurgence in humans may be due to a regressive gene that can only gain a foothold in a society that nourishes it, i.e. civilization.
It is not surprising that the overwhelming majority of the public who are AGW believers have not spent more than a few hours of their time examining the “facts”, instead choosing to put their trust in those promoting the hypothesis and (mis)representing it as an undisputed truth. As an analogy, it is not apparent to the first-time casual observer that a sintered bronze bearing is full of holes until it is examined closely.
toyotawhizguy (04:17:30) :
Skepticism is a form of self preservation, the will to survive, a defense mechanism, it is a trait common in all animals. An example would be a domesticated feline that will not allow itself to be approached by a stranger, even if friendly. (However once the stranger feeds the cat, this will usually change). Natural selection predicts that species lacking healthy skepticism will not survive, and its appearance is the true anomaly. It’s resurgence in humans may be due to a regressive gene that can only gain a foothold in a society that nourishes it, i.e. civilization.
It is not surprising that the overwhelming majority of the public who are AGW believers have not spent more than a few hours of their time examining the “facts”, instead choosing to put their trust in those promoting the hypothesis and (mis)representing it as an undisputed truth.
============
I’m skeptical when people who have spent a few hours examining the facts claim they know more about global warming than climate scientists who have spent years examining the facts.
George Lakoff wrote an important PhD dissertation back in 1966 (later published as Irregularity in Syntax). Unfortunately, the quality of his work has been in decline ever since.