EPA funded Sociologist Sabrina McCormick has some advice for city officials trying to push their climate projects past the legislature;
The best way to fight climate change? Don’t call it climate change.
American cities from Boston to Baton Rouge are getting hammered by hurricanes, torrential downpours, and blizzards amped up by climate change. Maybe that’s why Americans are coming around to the idea that the climate is actually changing. But are all the floods, heat waves, and other disasters spurring cities to prepare for our overheated future?
Sabrina McCormick, a sociologist at George Washington University who once investigated how cities cope with disasters for the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, set out earlier this year to find out. Her study, recently published in the journal Climatic Change, breaks down 65 in-depth interviews with city officials and experts in six cities — Portland, Boston, Los Angeles, Raleigh, Tucson, and Tampa. It seeks to answer the etiquette question from hell: How does a city go about preparing for something that its residents would rather not think about, or even believe in?
In a recent interview, McCormick said she learned that many city officials believe the key to getting everybody on board to battle climate change is to avoid uttering the words “climate change.” It’s “a poisonous term to use,” one said. …
Read more: http://grist.org/cities/the-best-way-to-fight-climate-change-dont-call-it-climate-change/
The study referenced by the Grist article;
Localized vulnerability assessments are critical to effective climate adaptation. However, the differences between how local decision-makers and experts see vulnerability have not yet been fully explored, especially in the United States. Seeing possible distinctions between these approaches is critical since it is necessary to ensure a comprehensive, accountable approach. This research explores the distinct approach of local stakeholders to conceptualizing climate vulnerability in six American cities. Sixty-five interviews of cross-sectoral local stakeholders were conducted in: Boston (MA), Los Angeles (CA), Portland (OR), Raleigh (NC), and Tampa (FL). Findings demonstrate that conceptualizations of vulnerability are affected by intellectual frameworks that tend to orient around infrastructure and human health; that retrospective and prospective thinking are inter-related and affect one another; and that institutionalized forms and biases are critical. These factors shape the way that vulnerability is conceived differently than traditional expert frameworks.
Read more (paywalled): http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-016-1757-3
I’m not sure how McCormick reconciles “an accountable approach” with not mentioning that proposed public works projects are part of a climate agenda. Perhaps accountability means something different to sociologists.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Sociology is the science of understanding how to manipulate societies.
And Wikipedia keeps telling me that it is Watts Up With That that is devoted to Climate Change Denial.
This comment by Ms. McCormick illustrates a fundamental aspect of the situation. These non-scientists claim to have the solution to an earth-shaking problem, one that will cost trillions of dollars and the liberties of millions if not billions, but they cannot even settle upon unambiguous definitions of the terms used to describe the problem.
The very first thing you must do to solve a problem is to clearly and unambiguously define the terms you are using to describe the problem. You can’t add “1” and “2” until you can agree on what “1”, “2”, and “add” mean.
“Her study, recently published in the journal Climatic Change” Odd publication to announce that “Climate Change” is a poisonous phrase.
Noble cause corruption on steroids.
Isn’t she actually arguing just the opposite ?
Findings demonstrate that conceptualizations of intellectual frameworks that tend to orient around infrastructure and human health are affected by vulnerability.
What does this mean?
From the Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology
Climate outlook overview
Spring (September to November) rainfall is likely to be above average across parts of northern Australia. Elsewhere, the chances of a wetter or drier spring are roughly equal.
Warmer days are likely across much of Australia, except eastern NSW and southern Queensland.
Warmer nights are likely for Australia, except southwest Australia, northeast NSW and southeast Queensland.
Climate influences include a weakening negative Indian Ocean Dipole, and tropical Pacific Ocean temperatures which may approach—or briefly exceed—La Niña thresholds (see the Climate Influences section).
In the old days of the nuclear weapons panic, the doomsday term was Mutually Assured Destruction, MAD. Climate Change the policy panic means exactly the same thing – maybe we should start using it. There are some other great terms from the time – how about Overkill Ratio applied to polar bears. And “We cannot allow a doomsday gap!”
Her message to climate alarmists seems to be STFU! I couldn’t agree more.
It’s fact-resistant humans not global wa.., no wait, climate change that will destroy the earth.
According to the New Yorker, Earth is in trouble due to a NEW STRAIN OF FACT-RESISTANT HUMANS. Instead of climate change it’s these humans that are going to cause the destruction of the earth. Davis Logsdon, an author of the study states “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.
https://youtu.be/dIto5mwDLxo
Us Brits are good at this too!
“American cities from Boston to Baton Rouge are getting hammered by hurricanes, torrential downpours, and blizzards amped up by climate change.” HUH? Hammered by hurricanes? We haven’t been hammered every since ALGORE stood upon the hill and claimed his nonsense. It’s tough reading this lying bs. Liars everywhere.
And no-nothings are getting ahead and rewarded.
American cities from Boston to Baton Rouge are getting hammered by hurricanes
Reading this you could be forgiven for thinking hurricanes make land-fall every nine hours/days or even weeks.
According to weather.com…
No Major Hurricane Has Made Landfall In the U.S. In More Than 9 Years
Maybe they shouldn’t mention hurricanes, either.
Here is a supplement to the consultant recommendations and shall we say careless editing of local official input in the final report.
Rebrand the policy goals and crisis agenda as:
1) Mean weather (updating crazy weather)
2) Future lost (if you don’t agree with agency directives)
3) Lost Generation (to gen up some more class divide)
4) Mad Weather (to address the Mayor’s comment)
Why oh why can’t folk just use the term “ever changing climate”. It’s accurate for ever and needs no computer model!!
Yes, it is poisonous for election results, especially local ones.
We have quite recently had two stories about incorrect or corrupt science.
1 – A new Mayo Clinic study finds no evidence ” that tightly controlling elevated blood sugar will reduce the risk of death, stroke, kidney failure, blindness and other dire outcomes associated with Type 2 diabetes.” link
2 – The sugar industry bought off Harvard researchers so they would blame fat rather than sugar for heart disease. link
People have been hearing about this kind of unreliable science for a long time.
It is no wonder that people don’t trust scientists.
Just call it Asthma World, since it’s the all purpose form-fit science tool for EPA.
It occured to me that the Alarmists had the same conversation around 2008-2009 concerning the label: Global Warming.. Hence, the birth of the moniker, Climate Change. Perhaps the IPCC should be more concerned with science than branding.
“How does a city go about preparing for something that its residents would rather not think about, or even believe in?”
One supposes the same way they prepare for alien attacks, rifts in the time/space continuum, intrusions by alternate universes, etc.
Quite true, Reality Check.
I’d rather not think about those things. And besides, all of those things you mention take the same preparation measures: more taxes, stop using fossil fuels, loss of personal freedom, and submit to a one-world government.
Translation: They’re on to that trick, time to find a new one.
How do these people look at themselves in a mirror?