Essay by Eric Worrall
“… Climate change deniers simplify the spectrum of possible scientific consensus into two categories: 100% agreement or no consensus at all. If it’s not one, it’s the other. …”
The thinking error that makes people susceptible to climate change denial
Published: May 2, 2023 10.13pm AEST
Jeremy P. Shapiro
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Psychological Sciences, Case Western Reserve UniversityCold spells often bring climate change deniers out in force on social media, with hashtags like #ClimateHoax and #ClimateScam. Former President Donald Trump often chimes in, repeatedly claiming that each cold snap disproves the existence of global warming.
From a scientific standpoint, these claims of disproof are absurd. Fluctuations in the weather don’t refute clear long-term trends in the climate.
Yet many people believe these claims, and the political result has been reduced willingness to take action to mitigate climate change.
Why are so many people susceptible to this type of disinformation? My field, psychology, can help explain – and help people avoid being misled.
The allure of black-and-white thinking
Close examination of the arguments made by climate change deniers reveals the same mistake made over and over again. That mistake is the cognitive error known as black-and-white thinking, also called dichotomous and all-or-none thinking. As I explain in my book “Finding Goldilocks,” black-and-white thinking is a source of dysfunction in mental health, relationships – and politics.
…
Climate change deniers simplify the spectrum of possible scientific consensus into two categories: 100% agreement or no consensus at all. If it’s not one, it’s the other.
…
Read more: https://theconversation.com/the-thinking-error-that-makes-people-susceptible-to-climate-change-denial-204607
Do any of you seriously believe a single cold snap disproves global warming?
I personally support the premise that the world has warmed since the mid 1800s, and anthropogenic CO2 likely contributed. A single cold snap is not proof that global warming has stopped, that would be an absurd proposition.
But climate alarmists seem all too ready to promote the black and white thinking fallacy Professor Shapiro accuses deniers of embracing, they seem very ready to spin every heatwave as proof of the global warming end times.
For example;
3Q: Why Europe is so vulnerable to heat waves
Climate modeling shows that this summer’s devastating European heat wave may indeed be a harbinger of the future for that region.
David L. Chandler | MIT News Office
Publication Date: October 11, 2022This year saw high-temperature records shattered across much of Europe, as crops withered in the fields due to widespread drought. Is this a harbinger of things to come as the Earth’s climate steadily warms up?
Elfatih Eltahir, MIT professor of civil and environmental engineering and H. M. King Bhumibol Professor of Hydrology and Climate, and former doctoral student Alexandre Tuel PhD ’20 recently published a piece in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists describing how their research helps explain this anomalous European weather. The findings are based in part on analyses described in their book “Future Climate of the Mediterranean and Europe,” published earlier this year. MIT News asked the two authors to describe the dynamics behind these extreme weather events.
Q: Was the European heat wave this summer anticipated based on existing climate models?
Eltahir: Climate models project increasingly dry summers over Europe. This is especially true for the second half of the 21st century, and for southern Europe. Extreme dryness is often associated with hot conditions and heat waves, since any reduction in evaporation heats the soil and the air above it. In general, models agree in making such projections about European summers. However, understanding the physical mechanisms responsible for these projections is an active area of research.
…
Read more: https://news.mit.edu/2022/europe-heat-waves-climate-change-1011
What about Professor Shapiro’s claim that President Trump thinks cold snaps disprove global warming?
Do any of you seriously believe President Trump thinks cold snaps disprove global warming? Or is it more likely he is poking fun at alarmists?
Did this humorous tweet get included in Professor Shapiro’s analysis? Was it part of his proof that climate deniers, and he specifically cited President Trump, are black and white thinkers?
If so, how could Professor Shapiro make such an obvious mistake?
My personal theory is most greens don’t possess a sense of humour, so they have difficulty recognising humour when they see it. I accept that Professor Shapiro genuinely believes Trump is being serious when he pokes fun at climate alarmist tropes.
Of course, I’m not an adjunct assistant professor of psychological sciences, whatever that is. Feel free to share your own theory, about what might have gone wrong with Professor Shapiro’s analysis.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I assume this article was meant to be ironic. Climate change catastrophists take every heat wave and drought is proof of runaway warming that will end all life on Earth.
Every night on ABC they have a weather disaster bit with a meteorologist standing in a flooded river or out in a snow storm or on the side of a mudslide. Every night! The implication is that this is part of the existential emergency of climate change! To me it’s just freakin weather. Now who is the one with the thinking error?
“From a scientific standpoint, these claims of disproof are absurd”
What is truly scientifically absurd, is referring to model projections of drier European summers due to rising CO2 forcing (+NAO), when some regions have seen on average wetter summers since 1995 due to lower indirect solar forcing (-NAO).
But taunting alarmists with cold extremes which the model projections suggest should be less frequent is kind of funny, but that’s not based on real science either as both major heat and cold waves are discretely solar driven and not ‘climate forced’.
Right. The man is:
Jeremy P. Shapiro
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Psychological Sciences, Case Western Reserve University
Ok. If this was not the reputable site I know it to be I would have laughed and forget about it.
This man is an Adjunct Assistant Professor. In my country anybody can call himself Professor. It is not a protected title. But he is an Assistant Prof. So not even a self claimed Professor but an Assistant one. How odd and who does such a thing to themselves?
But it gets weirder. He actually is an Adjunct etc. so he is basically a helper to the helper of a professor which in itself can be anything.
He then claims to be that in the Psychological Sciences. I only know of Social Sciences or Psychology. Very very curious indeed. BTW both are not science. There are merely a string of opinions and a lot of talking about those opinions. I call that happy hour.
Furthermore he claims to be from a “Reserve” university. Ok that’s enough.
April Fool’s is late this year just like spring . Must be all that Global Cooling that I don’t believe in
How odd and who does such a thing to themselves?
You self identify and wherever the journey takes you didn’t you know?
Lesbian woman of colour ‘holding up the mirror’ to the Left (msn.com)
Do keep up with woke science.
Isn’t “Psychological Sciences” an oxymoron?
They actually make more money than other social sciences and econ because their services are often covered in the health insurance plans from employers and Medicaid Plans of “free” state coverage for the poor. They are also enriched by schools as child psychologists–so they can make a lot more money working multiple positions with adjunct academic as one of several. Ka-ching $$$
It’s your basic strawman argument. When you can’t assail your opponent’s valid arguments, you make up arguments that you can assail and attribute them to your opponent.
Apparently they don’t teach the concept of “logical fallacies” in psychology classes.
“I personally support the premise that the world has warmed since the mid 1800s, and anthropogenic CO2 likely contributed. “
Yet, looking past this psychologist’s personal beliefs, atmospheric CO2 levels did not increase significantly until the mid 1900s. So what’s up with that initial 100 years of warming?
And what’s up with those cooling periods in between the warming periods.
The professor seems to think the temperatures have steadily climbed but in fact they have climbed and fallen again and again. So which portion of this warming is he talking about?
Climate change deniers simplify…
IMO, greens simplify “deniers” and their thinking into caricatures that are easy strawmen to attack. This article is a perfect example.
I’m 97% sure that there isn’t a 100% consensus and that “the science” isn’t settled.
The “progressive greens” are the ones who invented “climate change denier” to denigrate all those who do not support their war on fossil fuels and a centralized world government with full control of the world’s economy.
When does ChatGPT or other more advanced AI systems replace Adjunct Assistant Professors of Psychological Sciences anyway? I’m ready.
seems to me climate deniers suffer from only one thing – common sense
When are these idiots going to learn that consensus is NOT science.
The real error is in thinking that consensus has anything to do with science.
May I suggest that Professor Shapiro is the one suffering from thinking errors. This difficulty in thinking arising from a deep seated bigotry toward those who do not support his views, which is evidenced by the use of such pejorative terms such as “climate change denier”.
If he had done any research on the subject he would know that the “Deniers” do not deny that the climate changes, we know it is in a constant state of change seeking a balance it will never achieve. We also know that the climate has gone through numerous cycles of sharp increases in temperature followed by declines in temperature over the millennia having absolutely nothing to do with CO2 levels. As a consequence we question the claims of the “Warmists”, after all questioning/skepticism is at the core of science, who use computer models that fail to accurately portray the climate and insanely demand policies that will kill millions of the most vulnerable, from cold and starvation, if implemented.
Shapiro uses the perjuritive “climate change deniers” term for skeptics. That immediately disqualifies and discredits his opinion as being anything worth considering.
He belongs to the “climate can also cool”-denier school of lunacy.
Great Trump tweet. Shows more than just a sense of humor.
He’s not just playing on the constant eco-communist propagandizing over every bit of hot weather, pretending it is a manifestation of global warming.
I think it shows Trump to be aware that the actual danger is global cooling, not global warming, and that cooling really is bad, while warming (if we are lucky enough to have it continue), is good.
We really do need global warming! Good on Trump for saying it.
The extreme irony comes from the following statement in the article
Either he is making a strawman argument by insisting he’s targeting people who deny climate is changing or he has no clue what arguments are being made.
I guess that rules out the first option.
Implying he has made close examination of the arguments is disingenuous at best but taken at face value, an outright lie
But the irony is that he is implicitly categorising people as scientists who know climate and are correct about their analysis vs people who are deniers who know nothing about climate and are wrong about their analysis. What ever that analysis might be.
Psychology is barely science, and any article that starts by conjuring up Donald Trump is for children.
We have just entered a grand solar minimum, and this man like so many others will learn the hard way.
This comment thread provides rich material for Dr Shapiro, should he consider writing a new book.
What is the evidence that CO2 contributed to warming/ climate change? Physics doesn’t support that claim: CO2 infrared absorption – Climate Auditor
Is Shapiro’s article the best example of gaslighting ever posted on this site?
The entire 97% consensus is grounded in simplifying the spectrum of possible scientific consensus into two categories.
Nothing but a strawman from the prof. And you know he’s serious by looking at his glasses. No one who wears glasses like that has any sense of humor by the way. They all got sticks up their butts
“Jeremy P. Shapiro
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Psychological Sciences”
I think if you have to add the word science into your discipline name then it’s not self evident and in fact is reaching. What science is, has been allowed to expand to the discipline’s detriment.
“Jeremy P. Shapiro
Philosophy”
Would be more accurate.