Guardian: Climate Denial is the Fault of Old White People

Debating Society, Picadilly, 1808

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t The Spectator – Guardian author John Gibbons has written an extraordinary piece which blames climate denial on old white people.

Climate deniers want to protect the status quo that made them rich

Sceptics prefer to reject regulations to combat global warming and remain indifferent to the havoc it will wreak on future generations

From my vantage point outside the glass doors, the sea of grey hair and balding pates had the appearance of a golf society event or an active retirement group. Instead, it was the inaugural meeting of Ireland’s first climate denial group, the self-styled Irish Climate Science Forum (ICSF) in Dublin in May. All media were barred from attending.

Its guest speaker was the retired physicist and noted US climate contrarian, Richard Lindzen. His jeremiad against the “narrative of hysteria” on climate change was lapped up by an audience largely composed of male engineers and meteorologists – mostly retired. This demographic profile of attendees at climate denier meetings has been replicated in London, Washington and elsewhere.

Short-termism and self-interest is part of the answer. A 2012 study in Nature Climate Change presented evidence of “how remarkably well-equipped ordinary individuals are to discern which stances towards scientific information secure their personal interests”.

This is surely only half the explanation. A 2007 study by Kahan et al on risk perception identified “atypically high levels of technological and environmental risk acceptance among white males”. An earlier paper teased out a similar point: “Perhaps white males see less risk in the world because they create, manage, control and benefit from so much of it.” Others, who have not enjoyed such an armchair ride in life, report far higher levels of risk aversion.

Another 2011 paper observed uncontroversially that “conservative white males are likely to favour protection of the current industrial capitalist order which has historically served them well”. It added that “heightened emotional and psychic investment in defending in-group claims may translate into misperceived understanding about problems like climate change that threaten the continued order of the system.”

A paper earlier this year from Vanderbilt University pinpointed what motivates many who choose to reject climate change: not science denial, but “regulation phobia”. Most deniers accept science in general, and even pride themselves on their science literacy, however, combatting climate change means more regulations and, the paper says, “demands a transformation of internalised attitudes”. This, the authors conclude, “has produced what can fairly be described as a phobic reaction among many people”

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/22/climate-deniers-protect-status-quo-that-made-them-rich

I have an alternative theory.

The middle age engineers and meteorologists in that room in Ireland, and other similar gatherings, were taught how to think for themselves, back in an age when schools were focussed on education.

We learned our history – we learned that democracy is fragile, that sometimes people trade freedom for safety, even when the threat is imaginary.

We learned we should not believe everything we read – that people who call themselves scientists sometimes lie about their work.

We learned that it is OK to evaluate the evidence for ourselves, to reach our own conclusions.

And yes, we also learned that racial stereotyping is silly and wrong; that not all climate skeptics are white.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

290 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Phillip Bratby
September 23, 2017 12:12 am

perhaps “engineers and meteorologists – mostly retired”, are not gullible.

September 23, 2017 12:16 am

Come to think of it, protecting inorganic material (e.g. outside air and fossils) from life is astronomical and new to human history.
John Gibbons’ way of thinking is astronomical, but nothing new. He could start by studying the story behind the portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I in Neue Galerie, New York.

Ed Zuiderwijk
September 23, 2017 12:34 am

This is the first time I fit a stereotype. Must have done something wrong.

Michael Carter
September 23, 2017 12:51 am

Hey! – We have the Millennials and we have the Baby Boomers, but what do we call that lot between who created these terms (and write such articles)?

Reply to  Michael Carter
September 23, 2017 1:57 am

Generation X, no kidding.

SAMURAI
September 23, 2017 12:57 am

Yeah, …right…. “old white guys….” like: Hippocrates, Euclid, Aristotle, Plato, Thomas Aquinas, Galileo, Michelangelo, da Vinci, Newton, Pasteur, Lavoisier, Bell, Tesla, Maxwell, Watt, Hahn, Einstein, Fermi, etc., etc.
These “old white guys” were empiricists that advanced humanity and science by pursueing scientific truth, rather than pursuing grant money, fame, political agendas and political correctness. These “old white guys” adhered to the Scientific Method and understood that when empirical data refuted their hypotheses, they adjusted or abandoned their hypotheses, rather than adjusting the data to match their erroneous assumptions…
CAGW has become a joke because those advocating this disconfirmed hypothesis fail to base their understanding on the scientific principles and methods “old white guys” established over two millennia ago…
The reason for most of humanity’s problems is that “old-white-guy” empiricism has been replaced by Leftists’ empirical and moral relativism in pursuit of polical correctness…

John Law
Reply to  SAMURAI
September 23, 2017 2:44 am

You missed out Michael Faraday!

Mick
Reply to  John Law
September 23, 2017 10:14 am

linus pauling and his work on sickle cell anemia. Oh and DNA. Oh and organic chemistry. His name is rarely ever mentioned in science blogs.

Nigel S
Reply to  John Law
September 23, 2017 12:43 pm

Einstein was only 26 when he published his paper on special relativity.

Reply to  Nigel S
September 23, 2017 6:23 pm

According to urban legend, Einsten didn’t speak until he was five. His life isn’t repeatable.

Mick
Reply to  John Law
September 23, 2017 7:39 pm

Einstein came up with theories and are still argued today. Pauling actually changed science and medicine beyond the theory stage. Also was outspoken and possibly jailed for saying that radiation was harmful to living organisms. My opinion is that Einstein is highly overrated.
I must admit that i am not completely familiar with everything that hes done. If it were that life changing i would be aware of it.

Pat
September 23, 2017 1:23 am

As far as I can see the proponents of AGW are no spring chickens, and are very pale.
Also they have been enriched by their position.
Projection.

PiperPaul
Reply to  Pat
September 23, 2017 6:17 am

Also they have been enriched by their position.
Usually sourced from taxpayers, of course.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 23, 2017 1:24 am

A minor point, but I think painting any group of people in bigoted one-dimensional terms should be called a monotype, not a stereotype, but I know I’ll never win that one Ed.
Now I have the ultimate proof that giving up 30 plus years of reading The Guardian was a necessary and smart move. I’m truly sorry the newspaper has been so pathetic that it could publish such idiotic views.
Sadly none of the people running the Guardian seem to show any understanding of what they are destroying, let alone science or the fact that engineers and technically trained people might have good reasons for not going alongwith current fashions in climate religion.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 23, 2017 1:52 am

Do you think the Guardian will last another year?

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 23, 2017 2:46 am

I hope so Eric, but I suspect Leo is likely to be proved right.
This may just be me being old, but I wasn’t over-impressed either with Cambridge University recently announcing that it was considering allowing students to take examinations using laptops and not having to put pen or pencil to paper. Apart from all the potential for, let’s put it kindly, conjuring up material not in the student’s head by using (internet enabled?) laptops,I just think there is a virtue in being made to actually set down answers in your own hand. A bit like having to understand the dimensions of a problem to interpret the correct answer if you use a laptop than punching some buttons on a calculator (I’m not advocating reverting to slide rules just making a point about understanding calculations and words).

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 23, 2017 2:48 am

That should be Slide rule (not laptop) in the third last line.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 23, 2017 8:04 am

You can disable the wi-fi routers in the area of the testing hall. However it won’t make much difference. With tera-bytes of storage, they can easily store every text book available on their laptops, and search it quickly.

Sara
Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
September 23, 2017 6:49 am

Isn’t the Guardian that news outlet that decided to eschew ads for revenue, and wants your subscription money to support it? I only occasionally go there, because most of their editorials are tripe, and frequently bereft of real-world facts, and I certainly have no intention of financially supporting them

September 23, 2017 1:55 am

Testosterone Collapse leads to EcoFemiNazis to blame western man for raping Mother Nature
http://testosteronecivilization.com/sex-wars-the-fall-of-western-dominance-2/

John Dowser
September 23, 2017 2:39 am

Strange, when I read John Gibbons, it would almost seem as he was making the bizarre case that gender and ethnicity would be a factor in the level of fear and worries, or even distrust and resentment of people. In that case, even if he was right, he’d qualify as a fairly serious bigot. Not to mention that he links a color (white) and age (old) to having some inherently dysfunctional mindset, which is by definition discrimination, to write about it so specifically. Unbelievable ironic this stuff is being published while it’s undermining its moral premise. And of course, there’s always one or two social studies which can serve as quasi-academical justification. Probably quoted out of context as the conclusions of such studies are generally rather tentative and not meant to be used by journalists. Or at least, one would presume.

4 Eyes
September 23, 2017 2:49 am

I am a 63 yr mechanical engineer by training. I am not bald and I am not gray and I really hope I meet Mr. Gibbons one day so we can compare notes about our relative value to the world. He is not an author, real authors don’t write trash like that. Childish critiques like that do him no favors and confirm to me that the people of words really are no more use to the world than used car salesmen and catwalk models. Desperate.

Hugs
Reply to  4 Eyes
September 23, 2017 4:41 am

We have racism, genderism, hairism, and ageism, but Gibbons makes it as far as engineerism – enginerophobia? What I’m not surprised on, people who are leftards and write to newspapers do have a fracking problem with nerds, i.e. professionals of hard sciences, to the extent that they easily give up when faced a problem with numbers. They say mathematics is hard and tend to think people who can calculate are retarded socially if not completely.
Climate change topics are all topics with a great deal of numbers. See the problem?

CheshireRed
September 23, 2017 3:31 am

Just another furious strand of the Guardians tried n tested alarmist strategy to demonise ‘den*ers’ at every turn. Attack, isolate, undermine and all that. Isn’t it odd how ‘settled’ science needs aiding and abetting with such nefariously dark arts when all they actually need is evidence?

gwan
September 23, 2017 3:38 am

Here in New Zealand our major ? newspaper The New Zealand Herald has degenerated into a Marxist rag with pathetic writing like this and the journalists just love climate change and scare stories and a lot of columns are wired from overseas . I canceled my subscription as it was like reading something out of a science fiction thriller ..We have the same PC rubbish and we are not allowed to criticize any one except if they are white middle aged males .I mix with a large number of people of different ethnic origins and I like to point out to them a peanuts cartoon .A little black boy was talking to a little white boy and the black boy said “I like being black” and then the white boy says “I like being white” so the black boy says “you’re racist “

September 23, 2017 3:38 am

You can’t put an older, wiser head on young shoulders!

ChrisDinBristol
September 23, 2017 3:47 am

Old people remember when the saying “They’d tax the air we breathe if they could” was a joke. . .

ChrisDinBristol
Reply to  ChrisDinBristol
September 23, 2017 3:53 am

. . . And Orwell’s 1984 was a warning. . .

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  ChrisDinBristol
September 23, 2017 8:39 am

Spot on, that’s exactly what is happening.

Vald
September 23, 2017 3:57 am

Well duh, I doubt the millenials, minorities or refugees will question anything.

Jaakko Kateenkorva
Reply to  Vald
September 23, 2017 4:12 am

Perhaps once other people’s money runs out.

Hugs
Reply to  Jaakko Kateenkorva
September 23, 2017 4:50 am

Nerves will run out sooner. Taxes may stand only when people accept them by voting tax-raisers like Greenies. I’m seeing AfD in Germany as proof of that people have had enough of Greenies.

arthur4563
September 23, 2017 4:19 am

I notice the glaring omission in this mature-white phobic article – where are all those non-white younger folks in all this? The groups that seems totally oblivious to the entire issue are the young non-White minorities. In point of fact, the only group that can be considered enthusiastic about global warming are the young, White, college crowd, who are also enthusiastic about
all kinds of strange things, censorship of opinion being but one. These are the true denialists – they deny the fact that , for example, global warming, whatever the causes, has had zero effect on such things as cyclonic storms and floods and droughts. The reaction to the recent hurricanes would lead one to believe that they think that strong hurricanes never existed before global warming took over. How they manage to explain those 12 years of hurricane drought is an unreported issue. The problem with young folks is that they have little experience and therefore a very restricted perspective. Young folks always think that their generation is the greatest of all time. One could quite easily shred any such ideas about this generation by simply looking at the things they DON’T vocally oppose – BLM, and Antifa, for example. This is what Fascist behavior is all about.

john
September 23, 2017 4:25 am

Santa Denial Is The Fault Of Old Wise People…(but it’s ok to lie once in awile to keep the mischievous kids in line).
Quid Pro Quo

john
Reply to  john
September 23, 2017 4:42 am

Al Gore’s sing along Christmas album 2017
Santa got run over by a Tesla
Frosty is melting
I’m getting a carbon tax for xmas
Green is good (duet with the grinch)
Better Watch Out (Santa Claus is going to drown).

The Original Mike M
Reply to  john
September 23, 2017 5:07 am

Those sound like fun, we should send our list to Paul Shanklin!
Hark the Starving Polar Bears Cry
The 12 Days of Warming
Away in a Tesla
All I Want for Christmas is My Two Wind Mills
O Come All Ye Faithful ( … oh co-ome yee to Al Gore’s estate. … born the King of Warming … etc)

The Original Mike M
September 23, 2017 4:58 am

I think it’s downright profound how alarmists use the same “logic” to blame old white people as they use to blame CO2.

Dr. Strangelove
September 23, 2017 5:25 am

I have an alternative theory. Retired engineers and meteorologists are trained in physics, chemistry, math and meteorology. They are science literate and their many years of experience made them wise. They are not gullible to climate catastrophes.

September 23, 2017 6:12 am

I couldnt agree more with your alternative explenation. And here I speak as one of the few “climate deniers” of my generation. Being in my 20’s I have experience first hand the transition. When I went through college they where already pretty insistant in the clamate change mantra. In almist every subject there was a climate change chapter, and in the test you has to get the “correct” answear id you wanted to pass.
It has only gotten worse in the last ten years.

Thomas Homer
September 23, 2017 6:18 am

“… likely to favour protection of the current industrial capitalist order which has historically served them well”
Is there a reason not to favor what has historically served well for everyone?

Reply to  Thomas Homer
September 25, 2017 10:52 am

Thomas, I guess he means as opposed to the agrarian socialist feudal model that has served everyone else so well 😉

CheshireRed
September 23, 2017 6:26 am

It’s worth noting how few sceptics remain on CiF these days. They’ve banned everyone else with alternate opinions so it’s become a bubble of climate doom. It used to be very entertaining but now, not so much. Their loss.

Roger Knights
Reply to  CheshireRed
September 24, 2017 3:42 am

CiF = The Guardian’s “Comment is Free” section.

Sara
September 23, 2017 7:00 am

Perhaps it’s time we dropped the term ‘denier’ and its related words, and used ‘opposing view’ instead.
Denier, skeptic, alarmist, hotter/hottest, EVER – those are all appeals to the baser emotions that are used as a means of scaring the cracker crumbs out of people.
It doesn’t work on me, because it’s been used and abused for such a long time now that the impact is gone. Why? Because if it’s a sunny day with a temperature of 85F in the shade, it’s a hot day. If it’s a sunny day with a temperature of 72F in the shade – not remotely hot.
I think you can see where I’m going with this. The Warmians have been banging the drums loudly for quite some time, and still have not proved their point in any way that satisfies my need to know. Hysterics, hyperbole, and using pejoratives like ‘old white men’ just do not work on me, not now and not in the future, either.
Not one of those people can answer this obvious question: Okay, we’ve had a longish warm period to advance civilization, so what are YOU going to do when it comes to an end?
Trust me, everything I’ve dug into in geology, geophysics and paleontology (no, not a degree, just looking for accuracy) says that these Good Times are going to come to an end.
I think they will be completely unprepared for it.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Sara
September 24, 2017 3:43 am

“Perhaps it’s time we dropped the term ‘denier’ and its related words, and used ‘opposing view’ instead.”
“Contrarian” is a word I like, because it is neutral-ish.

The Reverend Badger
September 23, 2017 7:37 am

I’m investing in a sun bed and a wig in order to transform into a “Meatloaf” denier. (2 out of 3…)

James Bull
September 23, 2017 8:08 am

Maybe why so many who question the consensus are older is we’ve been around long enough to remember what the weather was like in “the old days” and notice that things ain’t all that different.
Plus we haven’t been given the cash that the true believers get.
James Bull

TA
Reply to  James Bull
September 23, 2017 11:21 am

Good point, James Bull.
Those who are a little older have seen these climate “changes” before, and we survived the doomsday calls, of Global Cooling and Global Warming and are thriving, while the youngsters are sweating blood about their future on Earth, because of the CAGW propaganda being spewed in every direction by people who don’t really know what they are talking about.
But don’t count all the youngsters out. I have had several young people decide CAGW was not true, or had not been proven and they did so all on their own.
One of these was a nine-year-old boy last year. Having never discussed CAGW with him, I was pleasantly surprised to realize that he understood what was going on and had not bought into it, although they are bombarded with this propagand on a frequent basis in school.
Skepticism can’t be taught. You either question the status quo/current thinking, or you not. Some people can become skeptics but this follows being badly fooled by someone or something.
There may be a lot of new skeptics around when all this CAGW BS has been shown to be Climate Hyperbole.

Verified by MonsterInsights