Claim: People Believe in Global Warming, But Choose Not to Act

Kari Marie Norgaard
Kari Marie Norgaard, Associate Professor of Sociology and Environmental Studies at University of Oregon

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Sociology Professor Kari Norgaard thinks people believe in global warming, but behave as if it wasn’t an issue, by numbing themselves to the reality.

Climate Change in the Age of Numbing

“We live in one way, and we think in another. We learn to think in parallel. It’s a skill, an art of living.”

By: Kari Marie Norgaard

It was not long after my arrival in Bygdaby — a pseudonym I use for an actual rural community in western Norway — that I began to sense a paradox. Norwegians are among the most highly educated people in the world. Global warming was frequently mentioned during my time in Bygdaby, and community members seemed to be both informed and concerned about it. Yet at the same time it was an uncomfortable issue. People were aware that climate change could radically alter life within the next decades, yet they did not go about their days wondering what life would be like for their children, whether farming practices would change in Bygdaby, or whether their grandchildren would be able to ski on real snow. They spent their days thinking about more local, manageable topics.

Ingrid, a local high school student, described how “you have the knowledge, but you live in a completely different world.” Vigdis told me that she was afraid of global warming, but that it didn’t enter her everyday life: “I often get afraid, like — it goes very much up and down, then, with how much I think about it. But if I sit myself down and think about it, it could actually happen; I thought about how if this here continues, we could come to have no difference between winter and spring and summer, like — and lots of stuff about the ice that is melting and that there will be flooding, like, and that is depressing, the way I see it.”

Community members describe climate change as an issue that they have to “sit themselves down and think about,” “don’t think about in the everyday,” “but that in between is discouraging and an emotional weight.” People in Bygdaby did know about global warming, but they did not integrate this knowledge into everyday life.

Read more: https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/climate-change-in-the-age-of-numbing/

Kari seems to assume people believe and are desperately worried, but psychologically numb themselves to the awful knowledge of imminent doom so they can function in their daily lives.

The other possibility of course is that people are a bit worried, but not worried enough to act on their concern.

Advertisements

116 thoughts on “Claim: People Believe in Global Warming, But Choose Not to Act

  1. “We learn to think in parallel.” That is exactly the heart of the problem. Everybody is supposed to think the same thing and there is no debate. There is no room for science anymore, which is replaced by “consensus”. The same holds true for about 90% of our newsmedia: complete one-minded conformism. Other views are censured/deplatformed. George Orwell must be stirring in his grave…

    • If thinking in parallel, we must thinking, that everyone knows we living in Ice Age- the coldest Age in Earth’s long history.
      Worried about warming?
      That is funny!

    • Sadly the works of George Orwell are no longer read by the fully woke class, and your reference to him would only be considered a manifestation of your white privilege.

    • I like the part where she interviews middle school children who hear horror stories their whole lives and treats their anecdotes like it means something or should.

      • …or where she sets it up with how educated they are

        then quotes some moron and proves the opposite

        • Yes, some girl concerned the seasons might disappear! Definitely not educated about what causes the seasons…earth’s axis inclined 23 degrees to ecliptic, etc. Norway has very short daylight in winter, midnight sun in June…that CANNOT change no matter how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere. Is even Greta worried about the seasons disappearing?

    • A mild Norway winter is far better on Norwegians than a harsh one, so of course they’re not worried. I just don’t understand why people in northern countries aren’t clamoring for more CO2 emissions just in case the IPCC is close to correct about how much warming it will cause. Even under the most exaggerated worst case warming scenario, the climate of Norway will still be far colder than any Mediterranean country is today.

      • Yes, there used to be “Minnesotans FOR global warming”, who wanted some, as they shoveled much snow. What happened to them? We were promised some global warming, and we want it NOW!

  2. People may be worried about ‘Global Warming/Climate Change’ theory’ but they are waiting to see if there are any sign of the wild predictions coming true and so far there are none yet. People are just continuing to wait.

    • I disagree. I think the people believe what the media tells them. They do believe in Global Warming. And they believe it is scary.

      And they do choose to act. Just not in the way the Greens want.

      Adaptation is an alternative policy to trying to alter the entire world economy and infrastructure. Most people know they cannot do the latter so they are all for doing the former – adapting to what happens.
      And as adaptation takes resources the correct approach everyone is taking to fight Global Warming is to ignore it for now and fight poverty instead.

      It’s the economy that matters in the fight against Global Warming.

      • I hate the term “fight against poverty”. It almost always means government handouts to poorer people to reduce their poverty. All the various “anti-poverty” programs have succeeded in doing is allow poorer people to eat all the want of the worst foods.

        The only anti-poverty program that has really worked was during the second Clinton administration. Bill had lost a majority in Senate and/or the House and had to compromise. The compromise set limits on the length of unemployment benefits and a requirement to seek a job. People who got a job still received some benefits but were required to take government funded(but not run)classes to improve their work skills and habits.

        It knocked some 30-40% off the poverty rolls in a couple of years but that all fell apart as congress, in later administrations dropped the most effective portions of the program in favor of dollar benefits with no other “onerous” requirements.

        • Who would have thought that when you pay people not to work, that more people would decide not to work?

          • Mark many of our indigenous people in the red centre of Australia don’t speak English and thus have had little if any formal education. All indigenous people receive generous benefits, free transport, housing, medical and dental care and free education through to university.

            The city indigenous people who ‘identify’ as Aboriginal take advantage of these benefits, this is their right. The trouble is that they are going through an education system that is already leftist. This system does not empower them, it reinforces their own prejudices. The indigenous people in the red centre also receive royalties from mining and tribal law dictates that you cannot ‘refuse kin’, if you have something that your kin does not you are obliged to hand it over.

            I fear that the indigenous people in the red center are being kept ignorant deliberately, and I fear that it’s by their ‘own’ people. Little English is spoken in their tribal lands. It’s not just a matter of learning their language, their are 350 different tribal languages. Their lands are not accessible without a permit so what they know of the outside world is what they are told. Just what is it they are being told? They don’t run naked and hunt with spears any more, 4 wheel drive vehicles and rifles are more the go.

            Our indigenous people are not hated as the world is led to believe, but when the educated indigenous people aren’t willing to have a conversation it makes it difficult to help those who aren’t.

            Incidentally, our indigenous Aboriginals in the outback call government benefits ‘sit down money’.

    • I keep hearing that it will get warmer and warmer. We just had an almost exceptionally cool spring in the mid to eastern US. Now they try to say that was because of global warming and those months have been the warmest months in the history of the planet because it was just really actually very hot everywhere else. Obviously I can’t prove that, because I haven’t been to those places, but I hear it was exceptionally cool in India as well, so I feel skeptical.

  3. Bygdaby Norwegians obviously approve of the dialectical method in their discourses with Kari Marie Norgaard.
    A dichotomy of thought, which is mutually exclusive. The Bygdaby Norwegians heard Kari Marie Norgaard, but did not listen to her!!!

    • She tells us that her neighbors all believe in global warming. However we aren’t given any hard data, nor anyway to validate her claims.

  4. Or people aren’t worried at all because there is no climate emergency, and we don’t have climate derangement syndrome.

    When reality differs from your mental construct of reality, reality should take precedence.

    • @Matthew “Or people aren’t worried at all because there is no climate emergency, and we don’t have climate derangement syndrome.”
      Yep that ‘s my take on this. It is the opposite of what Ms Norgaard thinks. People don’t act because they don’t believe it. They know it is false. Some are aware that none of the global warming climate crisis horrors have materialised, others know because they have a particularly useful instinct; they know they are being lied to. Both types are cautious about saying this, so they say they agree, are worried etc. If Ingrid and Vigdis are high school students they have to watch their backs, go along with the crowd. Not safe to do otherwise.

      • Yep. Don’t say anything to rock the boat, even though every single prediction the “climate scientists” have made has been wrong.

        • Random attack on religion? I don’t know. You didn’t exactly provide a lot of context here. I’m not sure what exactly you are getting at.

    • Rational minds will listen to irrational perspectives a few times…. and then just ‘tune it out’. The hazard is encountered when the irrational folks get so frustrated with being rejected they turn to even more irrational violence to gain attention. We see this in action world wide today.

      • Also, tuning it out gives them a long, long time to infest all our institutions. If you can’t reach the adults, brainwash the children, after all.

  5. Another totally unsabstantiated claim from the soft “sciences”. Will these people ever learn that a theory does not equate to some gossipy ideas you and your friends had whilst drinking afternoon tea?

    It is pure and utter BS what you are proclaiming.

    Besides. believing is what one does in a church. There’s no science involved

  6. Eric is correct. The less complicated and more likely reason is that most people have been browbeaten into mouthing the words that make the pestering activists go away; without ever intending to support the cause. Even many of those who think they are on side with the talk have no sense of what walking the walk would mean. Global warming to them is about the evils of big oil and saving whales and puppies; they have no idea of what underpins their comfortable existence and oblivious to how the radical environmentalist lobby’s agenda would destroy this.

  7. Any “highly educated” person in Norway that worries whether their children will be able to ski on real snow or not need to demand a tuition refund from whomever “highly educated” them. That Kari Marie Norgaard ended up in Eugene, Oregon, at the University of Oregon is very telling. The LBGTQI group Queer Nation moved their headquarters from San Francisco to Eugene because San Francisco was not liberal enough.

    • They may have left because San Francisco is now full of ‘street people’ who litter the sidewalks with used needles and feces. Like most good leftists, their policies soil their own nests so they move to a new nest then soil that one. They don’t grasp why these problems keep following them. Self reflection us NOT their strong point.

      • Frisco is rough
        Take a wrong street and suddenly you’re on the set of The Walking Dead.
        Just a couple blocks from Union square it’s post apocalytic.
        I would encourage people to take their kids to see what comes of caring leftist policy.

  8. “*Sociology Professor* Kari Norgaard ”

    So she is academically certified as knowing jack…..

    • She knows how to mine the “Climate Change” science prostitution scam.
      It doesn’t take a high IQ, and actual work. Just “bend the knee” to the political science idol and “CHA-CHING”.

  9. Because polls that have no consequences are 193% accurate!

    You’d think a psychology professor would have heard of the term “lip service”.

    What garbage.

  10. “….People were aware that climate change could radically alter life within the next decades, yet they did not go about their days wondering what life would be like for their children, whether farming practices would change in Bygdaby, or whether their grandchildren would be able to ski on real snow…..”

    Um. We have now HAD the ‘next decades’. Life has remained the same, farming practices have not altered and snow is still around.

  11. training too, educated to worry when told to by a “spert” of some type
    but
    in their real world little is changing at all
    cognitive dissonance
    NOT acting shows they’re pretty sane I reckon

  12. I have to wonder why she thinks Norwegians would be scared of a little bit of warming ! ?

    Maybe the Eskimos should be scared too… gunna over heat !

    Some people really don’t have a clue… most sociologists seem to be among that “some”

  13. “Norgaard, Kari Marie. 2007 “The Politics of Invasive Weed Management: Gender Race and Risk Perception in Rural California” Rural Sociology 72(3): 450-477.”

    What a nutcase. The world really is mad. How is it someone is paid to produce such rubbish.

  14. What this professor thinks most people believe is far removed from reality. What she thinks – uses the word 18 times – is a worthless opinion. Her thinking is supported by confused reasoning. Let me explain.

    If people really believed in catastrophic global warming that will end human existence tomorrow, they would certainly do something today. Notice that she uses the phrase “global warming” four times and “climate change” six times but nowhere defines what she means. She does not even consider that many people who while they accept climate changes do not believe it will be life threatening but that human ingenuity will help us adapt and even benefit from the changes.

    How can sociology be called a science when sociologists write such drivel or hogwash?

    • We maybe witnessing the effects of “relaxed selection”.
      This person would probably not have survived in society even one hundred years ago.
      For example:

      Abstract
      Industrialisation leads to relaxed selection and thus the accumulation of fitness-damaging genetic mutations. We argue that religion is a selected trait that would be highly sensitive to mutational load. We further argue that a specific form of religiousness was selected for in complex societies up until industrialisation based around the collective worship of moral gods.
      With the relaxation of selection, we predict the degeneration of this form of religion and diverse deviations from it. These deviations,however, would correlate with the same indicators because they would all be underpinned by mutational load.
      We test this hypothesis using two very different deviations: atheism and paranormal belief. We examine associations between these deviations and four indicators of mutational load: (1) poor general health, (2) autism, (3) fluctuating asymmetry, and (4) left-handedness.
      A systematic literature review combined with primary research on handedness demonstrates that atheism and/or paranormal belief is associated with all of these indicators of high mutational load.

      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-017-0133-5

      • I’m not religious and I’m left-handed, so I’m genetically impure? That’s an…interesting…take.

  15. Warm times = climate optimums. Even the IPCC says so. Climate and economic models by Richard Tol actually had improvements until nearly 2C of warning. Of course once this was discovered in the reports, the charts were removed.

  16. The only people worried about climate changing are the ones running a scam for our tax dollars.

  17. And I bet she uses fossil fuels EVERY DAY!! hypocrite – judging others when she is the same.

    • I think it is important to understand the crazy

      Plus it’s so much fun to mock.

      So much stupid, so little time to mock it all.

      Making people laugh at them is how they get defeated.

  18. “Sociology Professor Kari Norgaard thinks people believe in global warming, but behave as if it wasn’t an issue, by numbing themselves to the reality.”

    The scaremongers aren’t doing a good job I guess.

  19. This professor needs a good lesson in reality. She should buy a farm somewhere and work it for ten years and develop a baseline of reality from which she can conjecture. Fear of the future is *always* tempered by current reality. If it keeps on snowing then that knowledge tempers the fear of the snow disappearing. And when that reality extends over years and even decades, people tend to dampen their fear of the future.

    It’s why people walk by apocalypse predictors with signs saying “The World Ends Next Sunday” instead of running around like a chicken with their head cut off. Reality intrudes and tempers the fear.

  20. Well done Kari..
    You went back to ‘The Old Place/Town/country’ and managed to detect that the folks there don’t think in the same way as you.

    Very lovely but we have 2 biiiiiiig, inter-related, problems here.
    1.1) Why *should* they think like you, or IOW, what sort/size of chip do you have on your shoulder
    (We figured that out from the ‘well educated preamble’)
    What gives *you* the right to slag them off publicly? (apart from the shoulder chip you have)

    1.2) Why don’t you live there any more – why the requirement to get away, half way around the world in fact?
    Kari, you’re the clever one – the answer to all *your* questions are in that little question.

    A bit like The Beatles in fact. Constantly raved about how proud they were to be Scousers (from Liverpool) but once they’d got on that plane and left – NEVER EVER ONCE did any of them go back.

    Kari, why was that?

  21. Michael they tag the word ‘science’ onto many fields now, so much so that the word has lost it’s meaning. Seriously, isn’t ‘political science’ an oxymoron? Though having said that science these days is purely political. The politicians pay the ‘pseudo’ scientists to promote their agenda.

  22. A certain meme is brought to mind by Dear Professors picture.
    Conservative women,more beautiful than liberal women,more masculine than Liberal men.
    Is projecting ones own delusion and idiocy upon others a science now?

    These soft “sciences” were called social studies when I was in school and still resemble self lovin’,cause they use no part of the scientific method.

  23. “We live in one way, and we think in another. We learn to think in parallel. It’s a skill, an art of living.”

    It’s called cognitive dissonance, and True Believers are rife with it. That is why they are so humorless and angry all the time.

    • +1

      Algore is a perfect example. Carrying a sign saying “We are all going to die in ten years” him when he gets on his private jet to fly to Geneva!

      True cognitive dissonance.

  24. I believe in global warming, global cooling and climate change. I don’t believe Co2 controls climate change, global warming or cooling.

    • And they are working to increase production today while simultaneously publicly divesting in the canadian oilsands, because they are so pure.

      Just more hypocrites to add to the pyre

  25. I don’t believe that “people” care about the environment at all. As a sailor I sailed from Desolation Sound down to Zihuatanejo, Mexico and never saw any pollution or even garbage in the water except close to cities and towns in Mexico. You could follow a party boat by the Styrofoam containers the people threw into the ocean. In Mexico I saw a pilot whale floating on the surface with a net wrapped around him. In Guadalajara I discovered that plastic bags grow on trees in Mexico, who knew? It is not developed countries who have a pollution problem, but developing countries. So that means all of Central America, South America, Africa, India, China, Russia, most of the far east, and the middle east residents don’t give a hoot about the environment at all. This awareness only seems to affect the cleanest countries already.
    And all you who read this site on a regular basis are way smarter and better informed than most people, so tell them the truth as you know it. You may not think you are influencing them but you may be surprised when they start to think about these things in a different light.

    • People need to have better than subsistence living in order to have the resources to fix the environment. Same as happened here.
      If enviros truly cared about the real environment they would be fighting to increase standard of living in the developing world

  26. It appears to me that ‘Ingrid’ is a clever cookie who realises that the ‘knowledge’ does not match what’s occurring in the real world.

  27. When alarmists demand action on climate change it is they who are responsible for the lack of action not sceptics. If they truely believed that we face oblivion if we don’t act yet when given the option of using nuclear they make excuses. This refusal tells me that they don’t really believe what they preach and the agenda is not about climate change but represents an anti capitalist societal change.

  28. OK; tell us what you want to do or else shut the f*ck up. That clear enough for you?

    And if the answer is, “prepare for serfdom,” then no.

    • “She says that, even if countries actually deliver the carbon reductions they’ve promised, we’ll still be heading for a “catastrophic” global temperature rise of 3-4 degrees.”

      Well then, shut the f*ck up! Back to your little depressive hellhole that you refuse to be treated for, blaming it on lack of totalitarianism. The danger of coronavirus is nothing compared to the danger of rabid ideologues like you!

  29. Kari Marie Norgaard, Associate Professor of Sociology and Environmental Studies at University of Oregon
    That says it all. She is uneducated. All of her training is indoctrination. Read her CV. She is completely out of touch with reality and has made a career of it.

    • You’d think that with all her self-made hype she would have at least seen an orthodontist by now.

  30. Sociology Professor Kari Norgaard believes in global warming, but lives a middle class American life.

    She’s the numb-psych, not anyone else.

    I’ve looked at her website. Gender justice. Social justice, Climate justice.

    Her 2019 Avoiding cultural trauma: climate change and social inertia, starts out saying, “Since May 2018, when atmospheric CO2 levels topped 410 ppm, it has become apparent that the earth’s climate is entering a new phase. Climate change impacts are advancing across the board. Yet despite extreme weather events and urgent warnings … blah, blah, and so on.

    It has probably never occurred to Sociology Professor Kari Norgaard to look at the actual data. Data showing that there has been no untoward increase in any extreme weather metric. Nor any unusual climate phenomena attributable to 410 ppm CO2. Unless one wants to classify the global 15% increase in photosynthetic activity and agricultural yield since 1980 as a climate indicator.

    One doubts Sociology Professor Kari Norgaard has ever published a paper demonstrating her knowledge of anything about the climate itself.

    It never fails to impress me, the number of sociologists who think themselves qualified to disparage on the grounds of science-claims they do not understand. She has girded herself with the authority of the IPCC and its incompetent hordes. She is operating on academic hearsay.

    Sociology Professor Kari Norgaard is the academic version of a kid who shouts insults and challenges, while secure in the arms of her father. Except this time, she feels secure in the arms of a blow-up doll.

    • “Rationalization is a process of not perceiving reality, but an attempt to make reality fit one’s emotions.”
      Ayn Rand

  31. I like the part where she interviews middle school children who hear horror stories their whole lives and treats their anecdotes like it means something or should.

  32. I personally know individuals who respectively:
    1. a prof who had 6 kids
    2. a tour guide who flies between the UK and where her tour is in the Med many times per year
    3. a graduate who does long haul flights every year on vacation, and burns trees to keep warm
    They all vociferously believe in AGW, and disapprove of people like me who don’t, and spread their beliefs through social media etc.

    Note to Kari Norgaard: when your allies take it seriously the rest of us will think about it

    • “when your allies take it seriously the rest of us will think about it”

      ahhh… NO, we won’t !

      Impossible to take the anti-science clown show that is AGW, seriously.

  33. She needs to look up the word: ambivalence.
    Most people could not be bothered to believe or not to believe in AGW.
    Or how about the phrase: paying lip service?

  34. People who live in Norway should be horrified at the prospect of mild winters? Living in ravines cut by glaciation, they know what awaits them if the natural cycle is not delayed.

    If they also follow the science and know how weak CO2-warming effects are coming to look they would be wanting more CO2 not less. You don’t have to live near the arctic circle to hope glaciation can be delayed but it probably helps.

  35. [catastrophic] [anthropogenic] global warming? climate cooling… warming… change? The frame of reference changes on a multidecadal… decadal… annual… daily basis.

  36. I don’t know anyone who really cares about global warming. Nobody. The only people who care are the ones who are trying to sell you their solution to the problem you aren’t worried about. And they’re probably faking.

    What’s the nearest projection for disaster these days? Ten years? If you’re twenty, in ten years the climate will not have changed in any appreciable way, but you’ll be thirty. You will probably have gained weight, and your skin will have lost a lot of elasticity. Most twenty year-olds find those possibilities more painful to contemplate than droughts in Nigeria, surely.

  37. “Kari Marie Norgaard, Associate Professor of Sociology and Environmental Studies at University of Oregon ”

    If you meet that critter in a dark alley, you would lose a year’s growth.

    I wonder what its pronoun is?

  38. “The other possibility of course is that people are a bit worried, but not worried enough to act on their concern. ”

    In Western Norway? Maybe they think that life would be better if it were 5°C warmer? We are talking about an area that is about as far north as it is possible to live.

  39. OMG! Kari it’s soooooo much worse than you thought…

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326210632_Cool_dudes_in_Norway_climate_change_denial_among_conservative_Norwegian_men

    Extract from the abstract:

    Expanding on the US study, we investigate whether conservative males more often hold what we term xenosceptic views, and if that adds to the ‘cool dude-effect’.¹ Multivariate logistic regression models reveal strong effects from a variable measuring ‘xenosceptic cool dudes’. Interpreting xenoscepticism as a rough proxy for right leaning views, climate change denial in Norway seems to merge with broader patterns of right-wing nationalism.

    Xenosceptic cool dudes….. FFS is there no end to it.

  40. In Vermont we are being inundated with wealthy refugees from urban areas. They seem to be fleeing the social unrest caused by their own political actions. People are buying houses over the Internet and paying cash for places they have never seen in person. It is as unbelievable as the rioting.

    The locals believe in the adage – “Enjoy your visit, leave your cash, but not your lifestyle.”
    As one of my hard working waitress friends explained – “I don’t respond well to finger snapping”.

    But come the aftermath of this winter, many will change their minds and leave.
    I hope.

    • Give them the answer that I got as a soldier asking directions in rural Vermont once. “you can’t get there from here!”

  41. In reply to:

    “Claim: People Believe in Global Warming, But Choose Not to Act”

    What the heck is “Act”….

    … there is no money and it is not possible to get blood from a stone.

    The optics of wasting money on green stuff does not work now.

    Regardless, how many voters want higher electrical prices when there is double digit unemployment? Kill the US companies that are competing with coal fired China?

    China is still building coal plants.

  42. Like most progressives, they may believe in something, but they are waiting for someone else to pay the price for it.

  43. Talk about gaming the system! From Dr. Norgaar’s CV: Not only is she interested in “environmental justice”, she is interested in INDIGENOUS environmental justice. Specifically, environmental justice for the indigenous Karuk tribe of Northern California. Her CV lists the following grants between 2009 and 2018 (from most recent to earliest):

    “Examining the effects of climate change on American Indian uses of forests,
    habitats and resources in Pacific Northwest and Northern California” With Frank
    Lake, Kathy Lynn and Jonathan Long, Northwest Climate Science Center
    ($74,000)

    Climate Adaptation Planning, Department of Energy on behalf of Karuk Tribe
    ($250,000)

    PG and E Resilient Communities on behalf of Karuk Tribe ($99,998)

    Climate Vulnerability Assessment, Bureau of Indian Affairs on behalf of Karuk
    Tribe ($57,000)

    NPLCC Tribal Climate Change Grant, “Preserving Tribal Self-Determination and
    Knowledge Sovereignty While Expanding the Use of Tribal Knowledge and
    Management in Off-Reservation Lands in the Face of Climate Change,” US Fish
    and Wildlife Service on behalf of Karuk Tribe ($34,386)

    Tribal Wildlife Grant, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on behalf of Karuk Tribe and
    Confederated Tribes of Umatilla Indian Reservation ($100,000)

    That would be the same 4800 member Karuk tribe that practices the ancient tribal custom of owning and operating a casino; Specifically, the Rain Rock Casino on I-5 in Yreka, Ca.

    • oe
      That’s $615,384 over 9 years, or an average of $68,376 per year, plus whatever she earns on her ‘day job.’ She has obviously found how to make the system work for her.

    • “Tribal Knowledge Sovereignty”

      That’s really rich.

      Sociology Professor Kari Norgaard is really lost in the wilderness.

  44. I wonder what questions this idiot was asking to get those responses.

    One of the large issues around AGW is the fake surveys and polls they do. When I had some PR training a few decades back, it was driven home how important it is to check what responses your Q’s will bring due to language used, surveyer body language and tone and even the order in which you ask the questions.

    So we have a radical lefty ‘expert’ talking to kids who have been programmed for years about the dire nature of climate and even so, the BEST she can elicit is a lukewarm, ‘I know about it but it doesn’t really affect my actual life’ answer?

    When I see ‘radical’ polls I always try to find the actual questions asked and of those I can find, all would have gotten a Flunk! from the PR instructors back in the day.

    The reason they keep being surprised is because they are trying to use polls to GUIDE the People instead of see where the People are heading.

  45. Sociologists are not climate scientists. They don’t realise that science is not based on public opinion.
    Most people have enough common sense to realise that a world that has taken 4.5 billion years to give birth to them and that all surface energy comes from the sun, that is not going to change overnight. As a for them useful alternative, religious people put their faith in the Almighty.

    Like a flock of sheep, many climatologists are blindly following their leaders of a cliff not knowing that the little they know is not enough to make predictions. They think, that just putting your ideas in a computer must give you the right answers, not realising that their omissions and errors make that impossible. It is like standing in the dark and from close range shining a torch on a large painting and without knowing the context pretending to know it all from that tiny observation.

    If you have not done so already, feel free to check out my answers on
    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-major-errors-made-by-scientists-in-approaching-a-climate-change-problem/answer/John-Bruyn

  46. The third option: I’ve evaluated the issue and it ranks dead last in my set of issues to worry about. It will not be a serious problem for me or my grandchildren. the coming ice age deserves far more thought, but even that will not be a serious threat because we will be able to adapt. Several major polls show that a lot of people share my priorities.

  47. I am both a qualified engineer a qualified social science graduate. So let us take my engineer side first. In all the years of computer modelling I had a pass mark of 95% timing accuracy and 100% correct functionality. As a result any less and I simply despise both the result and the people producing the result. Now the social science view point. The people around me without the specialised computer modelling assessment skills have a simple approach. They look at the headline predictions like Maldives flooded . NOT They look at the hundred months to uncontrolled temperature rises and tipping point. NOT. They look at the all glaciers melted by 2000. NOT. They look at no Arctic ice by 2016. NOT Three strikes and you are out. So it is well and truly a non issue. It is young mindless conformists, taught not educated, children who are convinced not thinking people and one thing I have found out from taking a degree in social science is that it is not a profession for thinkers with even moderate numerical skills. Man made climate change is the leaning tower of Pisa. A pretty structure based on terrible foundations that need constant attention and modification to stand at all. They after all the prattling about weather not being climate use weather data as input to their climate models. Even on an averagely sunny day the measured the temperature difference between road and the grass verge is around 10 degrees here. The weather network explicitly avoids measuring this so how can the data be suitable for climate models?

  48. Sherrington’s postulate from year 2010 is that elevated atmospheric CO2 is causing faster tooth growth in those born since about 1990.

  49. Asia seems to be very successful in numbing themselves, since they manage to rapidly expand their coal power system in spite of their overwhelming fear for the climate catastrophe

Comments are closed.