Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety

Hannes Zacher & Cort W. Rudolph 

Climatic Change volume 176, Article number: 32 (2023)


This study tests the hypotheses that overall environmental knowledge and climate-specific knowledge are inversely related to climate change anxiety, such that people who know more (less) about the environment in general, and about climate in particular, are less (more) anxious about climate change. Time lagged data were collected from N = 2,066 individuals in Germany. Results showed that, even after controlling for demographic characteristics, personality characteristics, and environmental attitudes, overall environmental knowledge and climate-specific knowledge were negatively related to climate change anxiety (both B = -.09, p < .001).

1 Introduction

The British mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) is quoted as saying, “The degree of one’s emotions varies inversely with one’s knowledge of the facts, the less you know the hotter you get.” Consistent with this idea, we report the results of a study that tested the hypotheses that overall environmental knowledge and climate-specific knowledge are negatively related to climate change anxiety. The rationale for investigating these relationships is that climate change anxiety may be reduced through interventions that enhance environmental knowledge. Environmental knowledge refers to the body of acquired facts and learned expertise in the environmental domain (including climate; Geiger et al. 2019). Climate change anxiety involves people’s self-reported negative emotional responses associated with their awareness of climate change (Clayton 2020). Accordingly, the measure used in this study assesses responses such as worrying and distress, reduced well-being, as well as concentration and sleep difficulties due to people’s thoughts about climate change (Clayton and Karazsia 2020). Compared to more constructive forms of worrying about global warming that result in adaptive responses (e.g., Verplanken et al. 2020), it seems desirable to reduce climate change anxiety because it has been shown to have detrimental consequences for people’s general health and well-being, including higher levels of depression, anxiety, and distress (Schwartz et al. 2022; Searle and Gow 2010).

Psychological theorizing suggests that a lack of knowledge about a topic leads to greater feelings of uncertainty which, in turn, may result in anxiety associated with the topic, whereas greater available knowledge about a topic is likely to reduce experiences of topic-associated uncertainty and anxiety (Hirsh et al. 2012; Jungermann and Thüring 1993). Indeed, empirical studies conducted on various topics (e.g., aging, interpersonal and intergroup relations, finances, entrepreneurship) suggest that knowledge about a topic is negatively related to uncertainty and anxiety (Nuevo et al. 2009; Stephan et al. 1999; Townsend et al. 2018; Wang et al. 2011). For example, a meta-analysis showed that knowledge about one’s own and others’ emotions is inversely related to social anxiety (O’Toole et al. 2013).

Several motivational predictors of pro-environmental behavior, such as environmental awareness, attitudes, values, and identity, are positively related to climate change anxiety (e.g., Verplanken et al. 2020). So far, however, no research on the association between environmental knowledge and climate change anxiety exists (Coffey et al. 2021; Whitmarsh et al. 2022). An exception is a qualitative case study on environmental knowledge and various emotions experienced by activists (e.g., fear, hope; Martiskainen et al. 2020). The descriptive evidence presented in this study suggests that both a positive and a negative relationships may be possible: “Frontline protesters were really concerned about climate change… They were often the most knowledgeable about climate change …” (p. 14). In contrast, the researchers also observed that “In terms of cognitive knowledge, a surprising number of our strikers were not very aware about climate change; with some even stated that they had no knowledge and were merely striking to impress others (such as a romantic partner) or to give a friend company” (p. 16). Another study showed that knowledge about the causes of climate change and its potential health consequences positively predicted cognitive and affective risk judgments (Sundblad et al. 2007). However, the risk judgment measures used in this study differ from the more personal and emotional construct of climate change anxiety, in that participants were asked to estimate the probability of, and their worries about, serious negative consequences of climate change in three specific countries (i.e., Sweden, the Netherlands, Bangladesh) for three different time horizons (i.e., 5, 50, 100 years).

In summary, drawing on psychological theorizing and research on associations among knowledge, uncertainty, and anxiety, we hypothesize that people with greater overall environmental knowledge and climate-specific knowledge experience generally less climate change anxiety. In contrast, people with less overall environmental knowledge and climate-specific knowledge should be more likely to experience higher climate change anxiety.

  • Hypothesis 1: Overall environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety.
  • Hypothesis 2: Climate-specific knowledge is inversely related to climate change anxiety.

2 Method

2.1 Participants and procedure

Time lagged data were collected from a large sample in Germany at four time points across three months (i.e., Time [T] 1 = August, T2 = September, T3 = October, and T4 = November of 2022). The time lags help reduce the potential problem of common method bias and allow drawing stronger inferences regarding the assumed temporal ordering of variables. Collecting constructs at different time points was also necessary to reduce the length of each survey. Participants were recruited by an ISO 26362 certified professional online panel company. At T1, participants provided information on demographic characteristics and environmental attitudes as control variables. At T3, participants took an environmental knowledge test (n.b., no data collected at Time 2 is used in the current study). Finally, at T4, participants reported their climate change anxiety, as well as the Big Five personality characteristics as control variables.

A sample of 2,066 employed adults in Germany participated in this study. The sample was 50.39% female and on average 47.07 years of age (SD = 12.18, range 18–85 years). Most participants (43.47%) held a college/university or technical college degree. The sample was not representative of the general population, as it did not include children, retirees, and unemployed people. The sample was also older and more highly educated than the working population in Germany (i.e., average age of 44 years, 24% college/university degree). Further information on the sample (e.g., income, industry) is available in Table S1 in the online supplemental materials (OSM; https://osf.io/5mqjh).

The first survey was initiated by 3,566 people. Sample sizes for observed variables varied by time point (T1: 3,256—3,562; T3: 2,350—2,353; T4: 2,336—2,337), suggesting some degree of attrition over time and some degree of missingness within each time point. Our analyses are based on a sample of 2,066 individuals who provided complete data on our substantive and control variables across all time points. Table S1 compares these complete responders to incomplete responders (n = 1,500). We also ran a logistic regression model showing that T1 demographics predicted less than 2% of the variance in attrition, suggesting that bias due to attrition was not a significant concern. Complete data and R code to reproduce the analyses reported in this paper can be found in the OSM.

2.2 Measures

Reliability information for all measures is reported in Table S2 in the OSM.

Environmental knowledge

A 35-item multiple-choice environmental knowledge test, in which answers to the questions can be scored as “correct” or “incorrect,” was collected from participants at T3 (Geiger et al. 2019). An example item is: “Which of the following phenomena has been the main cause of global warming over the last 20 years? (a) Reduction of the ozone layer (the so-called ozone hole), (b) Increased emissions of greenhouse gases (the so-called greenhouse effect), (c) Changes in ocean currents, (e.g., “el Niño”), (d) Changes in the skewness of earth’s axis.” Each participant’s overall environmental knowledge score was represented as the number of correct answers out of 35. Consistent with Geiger et al. (2019), we further computed seven dimension scores based on subsets of the items, including basic ecology (5 items), economy (3 items), consumption behavior (9 items), environmental contamination (5 items), climate (5 items), resources (4 items), and society/politics (4 items).

Climate change anxiety

A 13-item measure of climate change anxiety was collected at T4 (Clayton & Karazsia 2020; Wullenkord et al. 2021). Example items are “Thinking about climate change makes it difficult for me to concentrate” and “I find myself crying because of climate change.” Responses were provided on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. Clayton and Karazsia (2020) suggested that their scale consists of two dimensions, cognitive-emotional and functional impairment, which were strongly correlated in their studies (i.e., r = 0.78, r = 0.84). Consistent with Wullenkord et al. (2021), who were unable to replicate this two-dimensional structure using the German version of the scale, we used a single score of climate change anxiety in our focal analyses. As shown in our correlation table (Table S3 in the OSM), the two dimensions were also strongly correlated in our study (r = 0.88). However, we report results of supplemental analyses for each climate change anxiety dimension. As shown in Table S4 in the OSM, these results were very similar to our focal results.

Demographic characteristics

We controlled for age (in years), sex (0 = male, 1 = female), and education (0 = lower secondary school, 1 = intermediate secondary school, 2 = upper secondary school, 3 = college/university or technical college) collected at T1. Younger and female persons are more likely to experience climate change anxiety (Searle and Gow 2010). Moreover, people with higher education may possess greater environmental knowledge.

Personality characteristics

We additionally controlled for core personality characteristics classified by the “Big Five” model (i.e., extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, openness). Emotional stability (the opposite of neuroticism) is associated with clinically-relevant indices of anxiety (Kotov et al. 2010) and climate change anxiety (Clayton 2020). Moreover, people with higher conscientiousness and openness may be more motivated to obtain environmental knowledge. We collected the 21-item Big Five Inventory at T4 (Rammstedt and John 2005). Participants provided their responses on a 7-point rating scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.

Environmental attitudes

Finally, we controlled for environmental attitudes using a well-established eight-item scale collected at T1 (Bamberg 2003). Environmental attitudes (and closely related motivational constructs, such as environmental awareness) are positively related to climate change anxiety (e.g., Verplanken et al. 2020). An example item is “For the benefit of the environment we should be ready to restrict our momentary style of living.” Responses were provided on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.

2.3 Statistical analyses

We used ordinary least squares (OLS) regression for our focal analyses. In a first model, T4 climate change anxiety was regressed onto T1 demographics and environmental attitudes, T4 personality characteristics, and T3 overall environmental knowledge. In a second model, we regressed climate change anxiety on the control variables and the seven environmental knowledge dimensions (instead of overall environmental knowledge).

3 Results

Descriptive statistics and correlations are provided in Tables S1 and S3 in the OSM. The mean of climate change anxiety was 2.10 (on a scale ranging from 1 to 7), and on average there were 21.50 correct responses to the 35 environmental knowledge questions (range: 5–35). The bivariate correlations of overall environmental knowledge and climate-specific knowledge with climate change anxiety were r = -0.34 and r = -0.24, respectively.

Results of regression analyses (see Table 1) showed that overall environmental knowledge negatively predicted climate change anxiety (B = -0.09, p < 0.001), above and beyond the effects of demographics, environmental attitudes, and personality characteristics (see Fig. 1). Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported: people who possess more (less) overall environmental knowledge experience less (more) climate change anxiety. Moreover, scores of six out of the seven content domains were negatively associated with climate change anxiety in a separate analysis, including knowledge about consumption behavior (B = -0.10, p < 0.001), basic ecology (B = -0.06, p = 0.022), economy (B = -0.12, p < 0.001), society/politics (B = -0.06, p = 0.015), contamination (B = -0.09, p < 0.001), and climate (B = -0.09, p < 0.001, see Table 1). The latter finding supports Hypothesis 2: people who possess more (less) climate-specific knowledge experience less (more) climate change anxiety.

Table 1 Results of Ordinary Least Squares Regression Analyses Predicting Climate Change Anxiety

Fig. 1

The effects of the control variables were largely consistent with expectations and previous research (e.g., Whitmarsh et al. 2022). Specifically, in both models, education, environmental attitudes, and openness positively predicted climate change anxiety, whereas age, conscientiousness, and emotional stability negatively predicted climate change anxiety. In contrast to previous research, sex was not significantly correlated with climate change anxiety at the bivariate level (Table S3), but negatively predicted it in the regression analyses, suggesting that women experience less climate change anxiety when men. A supplemental specification curve analysis suggested that environmental attitudes, emotional stability, and environmental knowledge may be masking this effect in the correlations (see Figure S1 in the OSM).

3.1 Supplemental analyses

Due to a skewed distribution of climate change anxiety, we additionally considered generalized linear models (inverse Gaussian with an identity link) as a robustness check. The results of these models were equivalent to the OLS models in terms of the statistical conclusions drawn from our primary analysis (see Table S5 in the OSM).

In addition, although previous research suggests a linear relationship between knowledge and anxiety, we explored nonlinear associations between environmental knowledge and climate change anxiety. As shown in Table S6 in the OSM, there was evidence for nonlinear effects of overall environmental knowledge and its consumption and climate dimensions on climate change anxiety. However, as shown in Figure S2, these relations had a very similar form as the linear relations (i.e., “L-shaped,” suggesting “diminishing returns” rather than “U-shaped” effects).

4 Discussion

The results of this study add to the growing body of evidence that higher domain-specific knowledge is associated with lower domain-associated anxiety. They also contribute to the emerging literature on the construct of climate change anxiety, which so far has focused on demographics, attitudes, and personality characteristics as predictors and neglected the role of environmental knowledge (Clayton 2020). In terms of practical implications, the main finding that environmental knowledge is negatively related to climate change anxiety suggests that efforts to improve environmental knowledge, for instance through educational and training interventions, may help reduce such anxiety. This seems important given demonstrated links between climate change anxiety and more general forms of mental ill-health, including generalized anxiety, depression, and distress (Schwartz et al. 2022; Searle and Gow 2010). These interventions could be targeted especially at younger people and people with higher environmental awareness and attitudes (e.g., climate scientists), who are at risk of experiencing higher climate change anxiety (Clayton 2020; Crandon et al. 2022; Verplanken et al. 2020).

However, consistent with previous research (Wullenkord et al. 2021), the average level of climate change anxiety in our sample was already quite low and, thus, it may not be possible to decrease it much further through interventions. It could also be questioned whether climate change anxiety has only (and always) negative consequences or, under certain circumstances, may even lead to positive outcomes. For example, recent research has suggested that engaging in collective action to address climate change can buffer the effect of climate change anxiety on depressive symptoms (Schwartz et al. 2022). Moreover, the measure used in our study is based on a definition of climate change anxiety as “a more clinically significant ‘anxious’ response” (Clayton and Karazsia 2020, p. 9). Future research should also focus on the potentially beneficial outcomes of more adaptive forms of climate change anxiety, such as practical anxiety (Pihkala 2020) or rational worrying (Verplanken and Roy 2013). Compared to clinical forms of climate change anxiety, these more adaptive forms may be constructively channeled into productive responses, such as increased information seeking and pro-environmental behavior (Verplanken et al. 2020).

Data availability

The dataset generated and analyzed during the current study are available in the Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/5mqjh


Download references


Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wilhelm Wundt Institute of Psychology, Leipzig University, Neumarkt 9-19, 04109, Leipzig, GermanyHannes Zacher
  2. Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USACort W. Rudolph


Both authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by Hannes Zacher, and analyses were performed by Cort W. Rudolph. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Hannes Zacher and Cort W. Rudolph and both authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hannes Zacher.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 745 KB)

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zacher, H., Rudolph, C.W. Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety. Climatic Change 176, 32 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03518-z

Download citation

  • Received30 December 2022
  • Accepted18 March 2023
  • Published23 March 2023
  • DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03518-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:Get shareable link

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

4.5 10 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 16, 2023 2:44 pm

Don’t confuse me with facts.

April 16, 2023 2:46 pm

Go away. My mind is made up.

Curious George
April 16, 2023 3:20 pm

Greta is not alone.

Reply to  Curious George
April 16, 2023 5:09 pm

Transportation experts that recently testified before the U.S. Congress believe that the atmospheric CO2 concentration is between 5 and 7%.

Reply to  Scissor
April 16, 2023 6:54 pm


Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Scissor
April 17, 2023 5:14 am

It’s understandable that transportation “experts” might not be expert in climate science but you’d think that they would be familiar with the basics like the CO2 concentration. Since Biden wants a “Whole-of-Government Approach” to fixing the climate- all agency “leaders” should at least be at the Climate Science 101 level of knowledge. Perhaps Biden is discouraging them from such homework.

April 16, 2023 3:22 pm

I feel 97% safer with unsettled science …
settled science is so unpredictable !!

My major climate change anxiety is that, I wont live long enough to see the crock of $hit implode & the likes of Gore & Mann done for fraud.

Reply to  1saveenergy
April 16, 2023 3:43 pm

I wont live long enough to see the crock of $hit implode 

I have the same view and wonder what will be instrumental in causing the eventual demise.

Right now its demise is accelerating because most of the world population just don’t worry about climate change and they have growing economic might. They are more concerned about feeding themselves. Climate change is mostly a western belief and there are few small nations wanting hand outs over it. Nations of true believers will be sidelined to watch the rest of the world develop.

One outcome from the current fiddling with weather dependent power generation in the west is that weaning off fossil fuels is more than challenging. France is the outstanding example of what can be achieved with commitment to nuclear fission.

Reply to  RickWill
April 16, 2023 5:14 pm

You would think that some would learn from others’ failures. But Venezuela is becoming the model not the lesson.

At least we see people fleeing the most leftist states in the U.S. for more conservative ones, those with ironically warmer climates.

Lee Riffee
Reply to  1saveenergy
April 16, 2023 8:08 pm

The climate anxiety I have is that if, as you said, the wheels don’t come off this pack of lies, I might live long enough to suffer the misery inflicted by these creeps! I really don’t want to spend my elderly years struggling to survive because of bans on fossil fuels and necessary things that run on them.

Peter Meadows
Reply to  Lee Riffee
April 18, 2023 4:45 am

I am 82 and i know I will not be around to see what Net Zero will look like in 2050. But, then, with a bit of luck I might see this whole boondoggle collapse before I do.

Reply to  1saveenergy
April 16, 2023 10:50 pm

Sadly, Gore, Mann etc won’t be up for fraud – they were just following “the science”.

April 16, 2023 3:35 pm

Kermit said it best….High Anxiety is bad,,,,but High Green Anxiety is the worst.

April 16, 2023 3:58 pm

The less you know, the hotter you get.

Sounds right. You also get louder…

April 16, 2023 4:30 pm

Clueless worry.

Curious get informed.

I am surprised this got published in an established journal. It highlights climate botherers are poorly informed.

Kit P
April 16, 2023 6:03 pm

Almost everybody loves a bad zombie movie.

There is irrational fear and rational fear. About 50 years ago when I joined the US navy nuclear program, I had a irrational fear of radiation. Now I have a rational fear of hydrogen.

More knowledge reduces irrational fear but increases rational fear.

As a result I have become very complacent about zombies but look for the hazardous material placards on semi trucks.

Reply to  Kit P
April 17, 2023 4:39 am

Great post Kit. The leftists have placed hazardous material placards on CO2!

Reply to  Kit P
April 18, 2023 12:43 pm

Fear is contagious…. and the grid of self righteousness that is always follows is what does the damage. Those who are doing something about the threat have new authority to define reality. They are the righteous ones. Truth just flies out the window

Walter Sobchak
April 16, 2023 6:08 pm

I must be supremely knowledgeable because I have no climate anxiety at all. Lunatic politicians are another story.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
April 16, 2023 6:16 pm

For the record, the whole climate kerfuffle is a strong proof of the wisdom of the Sage of Baltimore, H.L. Mencken, who said, “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

April 16, 2023 6:11 pm

This a bunch of academic claptrap. I can tell you why some people are frightened, it’s because political leaders, academics, activists, mainstream media, eco freaks and power hungry zealots from organizations like the UN want them scared. They have been working overtime since the 1990’s scaring them. Their evil plan is finally paying dividends. If our students were taught to be critical thinkers instead of mindless sheep they would not be scared. Everyone involved in this study should be fired if for no other reason than for being an enabler.

Last edited 1 month ago by Bob
Martin Brumby
Reply to  Bob
April 16, 2023 7:27 pm

I am afraid I absolutely agree.

An extremely prolix statement of the bleeding obvious.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  Bob
April 16, 2023 9:00 pm

Exactly – a bunch of self-important self-professed ‘geniuses’ have composed a quiz comprising a test of how much trivia and irrelevance is inside your head. on any particular day or time.

They then use a computer (did they even *need* one if they are as clever as they claim to be) to filter out how rich you are, how worthwhile your job is reckoned to be and all sorts of other divisive stuff.

The Computer then spits out what it was programmed to spit out:
Oh look, you’re a really stupid and ignorant person doing a sh1t job and living a worthless life
…..and because A Computer said so, it must be true.

How do they not realise that they’re projecting – that The Computer is describing them.

Hello & Welcome to, not least, Climate Science

It is a variation on what the BBC does every week where they compose a little news story/quiz concerning current affairs and personality ‘happenings’ over the last week = stories that the BBC itself reported on

The implication being that you’re a dumb uninteresting boring stupid person if you don’t know the answers and especially all those things if you haven’t been avidly clicking-on and reading the BBC

yet another manifestation of how: Everything is now wrong
Especially you ##

…..and we know so because the computer said so and, broadcast the news instantly and globally

All this sort of self-important and divisive ugliness will be a self-fulfilling prophecy and not ‘end well’
Because they very people doing setting the quiz, are the source of the anxiety. How do they not know that?

## Quotes Pink Floyd -The Wall: Yes you! Stand still laddie!

Last edited 1 month ago by Peta of Newark
Reply to  Peta of Newark
April 17, 2023 4:43 am

Glad I’m over here stateside inoculated from the BBC. We live in the luxurious country with NYT, CNN and MSNBC. Jealous yet? (Sarc intended)

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  clougho
April 17, 2023 5:19 am

The NYT a few days ago had an article about “flash droughts”. They are getting desperate.

AGW is Not Science
April 16, 2023 7:47 pm

LOL like that “sample” question has a “correct” response. I’m sure the survey “designers” think the “correct” response is the “greenhouse effect.”

What a joke. And over a 20 year period?! WTF does that have to do with “climate,” the shortest cycles that underlie actual climate shifts are three times that long.

Overall not a surprise that those with the most anxiety are the least knowledgeable; only ignorance leads to “belief” that the Earth’s climate would be static but for the pittance of “greenhouse gases” emitted by Man.

Last edited 1 month ago by AGW is Not Science
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 17, 2023 7:22 am

This speaks to my question precisely. What is the correct answer to that question? And why do they assume that there has been global warming over the period of time they ask about? What if you think that there has been no significant warming, and that any changes, if they exist, are natural and cyclical in nature? Does that make you a no-nothing nincompoop? Is that even a category of knowledge in this survey?

Paul Johnson
April 16, 2023 10:08 pm

In this case, it appears that ignorance is NOT bliss, it’s anxiety.

April 17, 2023 7:38 am

Mel Brooks comedy classic High Anxiety is like all great comedy, it makes trenchant observations about human folly and flaws palatable. George Carlin had us laughing about a government that lies and hates us. We were entertained and laughed but missed the underlying truth. We rationalized and ignored…That Carlin is really funny but it will never happen here, no way, my government isn’t really that bad. Well here we are experiencing the reality after the laughter stops. Everyone here is an environmentalist who cares deeply about proper stewardship of the earth so we laugh when people poke fun and dismiss us because we know they are wrong about our views, they are simply ignorant. Gradually over the years the poking fun has stopped, the mask has dropped and surprise, they really do hate western civilization and are hellbent to destroy it. Climate Change is but one tool they are using. Their entire worldview it’s based on half truths, distortions and lies. Their fraudulent motives are self serving and totalitarian. The majority of people are just now starting to see the whole awful picture, coming to the realization of what these egotistical psychopaths are intent on doing. Slowly but in increasing numbers. So keep up the good work folks! The efforts here are impactful and really do move the needle in the right direction even when it feels like it doesn’t. This study proves it.

April 17, 2023 10:52 am

“women experience less climate change anxiety when men” say what?

April 17, 2023 4:03 pm

Interesting that women are less likely to experience climate anxiety “when men”

Glad to hear that the gender variable were included in the study.

I couldn’t find where they have the questions for the “quiz”. Anybody know where to find that?

April 18, 2023 12:37 pm

WUWT is now a mental health public service blog. A sure cure for climate anxiety!

Many other strange and creepy imperatives and anxieties have arisen since 2008….but I have been well inoculated. LOL. So I am still partying like it’s 1989…1999 or whatever but nothing like 2019-2023.

Last edited 1 month ago by JC
%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights