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.
They need to learn from Srarh Palin, she is great at influencing public policy without facts…
The greatest influence in my being skeptical and thereby, by their label a skeptic, alias a denier, flat-earther, etc has not been that I have been overwhelmed by irrefutable scientific logic one way or the other, but by the magnitude of their propaganda, the desperation of their agenda and the stench of their BS. No wonder there is a call to reorganize, to recruit the latest fad “professionals” (an eco-psychologist? WTF is that? ) . If the science was so right, there would be little need of population thought control, it would stand on its own as self evident.
“At Naropa University, contemplative practice and transpersonal psychology provide a foundation for this integration.” ”
That’s not Phil Silvers. That’s Professor Irwin Corey !
Like several comments on this thread already noted:
This easily qualifies as ”George Orwell: The Sequel”.
If nothing else it serves as a good reminder to all of we the rational sceptics:
”The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
Long live the Republic; and thanks again to WUWT for helping us to keep our eyes open. . . .
One of my favourite quotes –
“1984 was written as a warning, not an instruction manual!”
@b.mod, re: “[snip] . . what is your problem deliberately riding over the conditions of your registration on this blog? . . b.mod”
Sorry, didn’t see any ‘conditions of registration’. Nothing deliberate on my part, as no conditions were evident when I posted my comment.
Reply:There are blog policies. I’m not sure what b.mod was objecting to here. ~ ctm
oops, my apologies Anthony…i am just an avg person, didn’t think my handle or email was worth worrying over…..sorry…
REPLY: It’s policy, if somebody says something that I have to deal with in some way, say a complaint, I have to be able to get in touch with them. Either provide a valid email address or please don’t comment further. – Anthony
Well he’s a graduate of Sussex University which explains much.
And then today, the left decides you were too stupid to understand their global warming myths, you will be stupid enough to not understand the latest sci-fi fiction, John Holdren’s latest non-sense “global climate disruption” — the latest lie.
So they rename the hoax, ehhh???
You need to ask yourself, how dumb do they think people are?
I don’t believe there are many who deny that climates change but there are a whole lot of us that refute catestrophic CAGW. To continue to preach the IPCC sacred scripture using marketing tactics won’t make me a convert and I hope that there will be few other buyers.
It’s part of the re-education process promoted by the current US admin, just like health care.
Thanks Dennis,
My daughter lives in London, not flooded yet, but I must warn her of this brainwashing.
jim hogg says:
September 16, 2010 at 11:05 am
Very nice.
AGW will go down as the phrenology of the 20th century. The Phrenologists used to even have journals in the 1800s. Perhaps we can find one of them and have them analyze the bumps on the heads of the people pushing this stuff.
More wrong thinking!
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/sep/16/usd-receives-grant-raise-climate-change-awareness/
I hope they go hard at this strategy.
We live in a society bombarded by marketing messages like no other generation before. Advertizing comes into our homes through the TV shows we watch, sometimes popping up in the corner during the actual show as the advertizers know we got to the can during the commercials. The radio in our car breaks for adverts every few seconds, which distracts us from the billboards that have morphed from plywood signs in the ditch to full motion video on the sides of bus stops and buildings. Magazines have more ads than articles, mass transit is litered with ads, spammers are so sophisticated that it requires armies of programmers to keep them in check, my cornflakes this morning had a coupon for power drills in it, and don’t even get me started on browsers.
The modern consumer is bombarded by marketing messages and subconsciuously filters out enormous amounts of misleading information so automatically we don’t even know we are doing it. Our BS detectors know in an instant when the language used to back up a product claim is founded upon incomplete or misleading data. We filter it out because our heads would explode if we didn’t. We are more immune to slimey marketing techniques than any generation before us, and we recognize in an instant when the message is delivered in a manner that suggests there is something to hide.
So I would like to thank those marketing companies that have spent billions attempting to insinuate their messages into everything I look at or listen to or read. You have trained an entire generation to recognize and be skeptical of false claims at the subconscious level, and the psychomalevelantologists will fail in their fear mongering as a consequence.
Vince Causey says:
September 16, 2010 at 11:36 am
It is not mad, madmen are usually more intelligent than the rest; this is silly, idiotic, stupid, oligophrenic.
Orwell was only a few decades off and way ahead of his time, therefore a small adaptation in some of his 1984 quotes:
“the consciousness of climate change, and therefore being in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival.”
“How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? The records have been adjusted.”
“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are. Sometimes they are not. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”
Enneagram says:
September 16, 2010 at 8:50 am
“What the heck is an eco-psychologist?”
Eco-psycosis is the manifestation of the condition of enviro-mentalism. Eco-psycologists have found that this malaise can be treated by electro-shock therapy from the output of wind generators but is a process not without its risks due to the phenomena of tele-connect which can transfer the condition, during treatment, to the therapist. One safeguard under development has been called the ‘tinfoilhat’ which is currently with the UK Health & Safety Executive for approval of its efficacy.
The use of wind generators as the source for the therapy has found to be particularly beneficial due to their intermittent and unexpected output which adds an apparently extra dimension of surprise to the treatment which helps those afflicted to come to terms with similar situations in the real world such as rejection of unfounded opinions, hostility to proselytising and receiving an offer of a job not advertised in the Guardian newspaper.
(Whickedpedia. To add comments for incusion to this article, please complete the ‘fellow-traveller’ questionaire first.)
Charles D. did the arctic sea ice go below 2007? No
Did it go below 2008? No
Did you hear 2010 was an El Nino year? obviously not…
“George Orwell would be proud.”
George Orwell would be terrified, because lets face it, traditional us-them right-wrong hoorah propaganda isn’t easy even when you have massive state organs and a willingly complicit media to help you implement it. Even in 1984, demonizing the opposing ideologies relied on simple accusations revolving around hazy moral degeneracy and vague ‘they’re out to get us’ sorts of stuff.
But now… hey look, cuddly polar bears! You do like polar bears, right? Anyone who doesn’t is obviously evil. This whole “we know the answer, we don’t care what you say, and we’re going to save you if it kills you” stuff is a whole different level when it comes to promoting crazy statism.
Craig Loehle says: September 16, 2010 at 7:58 am
………
Never occurs to these chaps that the ordinary citizen is not so stupid.
Hi Dr. Loehle
Your temperature reconstruction has produced an unexpected correlation with the Gmf.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/Ltr-Gmf.htm
I notice that the UK propaganda site says four things and those four things are indisputably true. The problem is that they don’t add up to anything beyond a suggestion that further investigation is warranted.
P Wilson says:
September 16, 2010 at 11:06 am
“like Galileo, brought in chains under threat of death before the papacy for asserting that the earth revoled around the sun, we are not well for maitaining the scientific temper.”
Nice word picture but, since this site is about trying to ferret out truth, you ought to have a read in the venerable institution, Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo
I suggest you read the whole article.
An excerpt:
By 1616 the attacks on the ideas of Copernicus had reached a head, and Galileo went to Rome to try to persuade the Catholic Church authorities not to ban Copernicus’ ideas. In the end, Cardinal Bellarmine, acting on directives from the Inquisition, delivered him an order not to “hold or defend” the idea that the Earth moves and the Sun stands still at the centre. The decree did not prevent Galileo from discussing heliocentrism hypothesis (thus maintaining a facade of separation between science and that church). For the next several years Galileo stayed well away from the controversy. He revived his project of writing a book on the subject, encouraged by the election of Cardinal Maffeo Barberini as Pope Urban VIII in 1623. Barberini was a friend and admirer of Galileo, and had opposed the condemnation of Galileo in 1616. The book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, was published in 1632, with formal authorization from the Inquisition and papal permission.
Sorry, no mention of chains, or threat of death. It was at least as civil as Dr. David Suzuki’s suggestion that any politician who did not act on CAGW should be criminally charged, or something to that effect. Not that Suzuki is our scientific Pope. At least not so far………
If only our current authorities examined the theory of CAGW as thoroughly we could save ourselves a lot of grief, and taxes.
A direct link to the ‘working document’ is:
http://coinet.org.uk/sites/coinet.org.uk/files/Communicating_climate_change_to_mass_public_audiences_0.pdf
From section 7 :
‘Climate change communications, including government
communication campaigns, should work to normalise public displays of
frustration with the slow pace of political change.’
– Government organised protest rallies ?!