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.
“…mass public communications aimed at increasing concern about climate change…”
How about “mass public communications aimed at increasing debate and informed discussion”
And the sun is decoration in the sky that we have to change the batteries periodically to have light.
Sounds like will soon be involved.
Let me try to post again.
It seems to me that will soon be involved.
So I am officially crazy now?
PiperPaul says: “Perhaps re-education camps will be next.”
No. Re-education camps here will not happen. Too expensive. They will be outsourced to India or China.
The following would be a great idea for a sit-com:
You are in a re-education camp in India. You will be required to take a test before you can be released. You have just asked a simple question to explain something that will be on the test. The teacher holds a three-ring binder, and begins to look through it to answer your question. The teacher is a little hard to understand. Finally, he finds the page he was looking for, looks you straight in the eyes, and asks “Have you unplugged the telephone cord, and then plugged it back in?”
A philosopical system that started out with the brain-cracking constructs of Kant, Hegel…….. The mind numbing writings of Marx and Engels…….Communism,.whose rallying cry before WW II was “Capitalism leads you to the poorhouse”. Who claimed that all men would have prosperity under their SCIENTIFICALLY structured society……..when that was shown to be patently false, the rallying cry became “Capitalism leads you to war”………The communist movement in America died when the National Socialists invaded Poland and the USSR………You know that a movement is dead when the rallying cry became “Capitalism despoils the countryside”………..paraphrased Ayn Rand in her book ” For The New Intellectual”
She didn’t foresee the Movement seizing the CAGW agenda, but warned they are masters of propagana. This is their death throes.
Bill Whittle of PJTV.com had it right when he said that they know that this President is not just a once in a decade, or once in a lifetime opportunity……He is a once in a forever, last shot opportunity for the collectivists to enact their agenda.
Btw. It’been very cool in central Florida this year, with PM thunderstorms and clouds and nice eve temps about 95% of the time. The lake waters have stayed cool all summer too, from all the rain.
This emotional appeal by psychologists isn’t new. It’s been tried before.
The precedent was set by Peter Pan’s campaign to save Tinkerbell:
http://www.elook.org/literature/jmbarrie/the-adventures-of-peter-pan/216.html
From J.M. Barrie’s Adventures of Peter Pan, Ch. 13:
….she thought she could get well again if children believed in fairies.
Peter flung out his arms…….. he addressed all who might be dreaming of the Neverland……..
“Do you believe?” he cried.
Tink sat up in bed almost briskly to listen to her fate.
She fancied she heard answers in the affirmative, and then again she wasn’t sure.
“What do you think?” she asked Peter.
“If you believe,” he shouted to them, “clap your hands; don’t let Tink die.”
Many clapped.
Some didn’t.
If these people weren’t serious and in positions of power this would be a real scream. They are seriously delusional.
It’s still a real scream. Idiots in positions of power are funny. Of course they can still do a lot of damage but so can the clever ones.
We might think more about this so called problem if claims made were not so alarmist and prone to so many errors. But then the problem would simply go away.
“…(through, for example, lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations)…”
As they seem to be encouraging demonstrations, how about we “denialists” get together and demonstrate at this conference?
“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.”
How about “when the suits hijacked the environmental movement we knew something was amiss”
“A lutenist spends half his time tuning the lute and the other half playing out of tune.”
I have only two words to say in response to the fascist UK BS and one of them is “off”.
“”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.””
Professor, you’ve missed something out ie Denial is the outcome of looking at the scientific evidence for harmful climate change and finding it shallow, hyped up deliberately manipulated and misrepresented to meet a political agenda.
What you should be looking at is the psychology of more righteous then thou, fascistic control freaks who’s unswerving religious devotion to their cause blinds them to even considering that their crusade to save mother earth is scientifically groundless and based purely on fear mongering group think.
TinyCO2 says:
September 16, 2010 at 1:07 pm
“Come on guys, read the report!
http://coinet.org.uk/sites/coinet.org.uk/files/Communicating_climate_change_to_mass_public_audiences_0.pdf
It actually urges the sorts of honesty we’ve been demanding.”
But chances are that what you’ll get from DECC is no better than the ‘honesty’ in the official UK enquiries into the Climate-gate e-mails.
No UK Government (neither the last lot nor the current crew) will risk commissioning research, reviews, call them what you will, which might disclose the uncertainties behind the ‘settled science’ on which they have based their policies.
They don’t want to know in case what they find means they have to backtrack, particularly if it means admitting that some current and/or previous government spending has be misguided or, worse still, if it means falling out with the ‘green’ lobby.
That is why none of them has the guts to say:
“Hang on – what if the science isn’t settled? What if it’s a little bit wrong? What if it’s a whole lot wrong?
“Shouldn’t we try to get an impartial view before we take decisions which could cost this country its energy security, its economic security, its national security?
“Shouldn’t we think through the balance of risk, to evaluate the effects of proposed policies on these security areas:
– if AGW is happening and will be as bad as fast as climate scientists tell us;
– if it is happening but won’t be as bad or as fast, so that perhaps we have longer to develop strategies and technologies to counter it, or don’t need to implement some of the most extreme ideas (particularly the most expensive ones) around today;
– if climate change is happening, and needs to be planned for, but the anthropological element is so negligible that carbon management/reduction policies are frankly irrelevant?
“And shouldn’t we do this before we commit to more major expenditure from our limited post-recession resources in case it could be money down the drain?”
I’d like to hope that one of the Parliamentary Select Committees has more courage, but I’m not holding my breath.
P Wilson,
Thank you for the link. There is still no evidence of death threats nor threats of chains other than Bertrand Russel getting the chronology wrong regarding Galileo’s age, state of health etc., etc. Surprisingly, rather than using a citation Mr. Russell simply states “as everyone knows,……….” Reminds me of the CAGW consensus.
No mention of Galileo’s father being executed nor mention of Galileo being threatened with execution. The only execution mentioned was the execution of a decree. Easy mistake I suppose. Galileo wrote the brilliant book, Two New Sciences, while under “house arrest”.
However, it should be pointed out that the sun is still not the center of “the world” nor “immovable”.
Certainly the majesterium (sp?) of the Church erred badly enough in the handling of Galileo, but not in the manner that is believed by a consensus.
“We Are Thinking The Wrong Thoughts.” These arrogant b{self-snip} s are so close to it, they can’t actually see how utterly communistic and totalitarianist statements like that are. Anyone with any sense (and awareness of history) would run a mile from anyone using such language. Thought Police indeed.
“Let us make sure all of this nonsense is exposed as much and as publicly as possible, and that the incompetents involved are given as much chance as possible to put their foot in it……..”
Why not take a page from their own book (“lobbying decision-makers and elected representatives, or participating in demonstrations”) and crowdsource a demonstration at their own conference – an anti-propoganda demonstration, with placards like “No Brave New World” and such. Then move on to the political offices. The press would have a ball covering it I predict…
I was once proud that my country, New Zealand, separated Church and State some decades ago. Sadly, and I hang my head in shame, we have a new State religion which tithes every citizen without exception. The new religion is known as ETS which I suspect is an acronym for Electronic Transfer of all income to the State. Whatever the clumsy acronym stands for, the new High Priest is the Prime Minister himself, to be referred to hereafter as ‘Zadoc’.
Fact, once again, is way stranger than fiction!
I used to hate shearing hoggetts (next growth stage up from lambs) when I was down on the farm – jumpy, twitchy, little sods, none of them ever demonstrated any sort of sense and were exhausting to work with… Oh, sorry, you are talking about PROFESSOR Hoggett. I didn’t quite catch that, but is there a difference?
striving for authenticity.
An ecopsychologist starts his day wearing his green, organic cotton, free trade boxers. He had his weekly brief shower on Thursday. Tomorrow he remembers he will flush the toilet once. He will have those panties in a bunch by 10 o’clock when his patient asks if they will validate his parking ticket. How dare a human move around using an auto.
Chris B says:
September 16, 2010 at 9:36 am
Dennis Nikols, P. Geol. says:
September 16, 2010 at 8:50 am
“If you can find any official “Roman Church” teaching, or, any “Prince of the Roman Church” making a statement approaching the Marxist teaching of the end justifying the means, I will eat my words.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_exstirpanda
Ad extirpanda (named for its Latin incipit) was a papal bull, promulgated on May 15, 1252, by Pope Innocent IV, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics.
Bon apettit!