Interestingly it isn't because deniers are particularly stupid (in the main) or prone to ignore facts in general. Most of them, after all, participate fully in a modern world where they demonstrably hold belief systems dependant on the proven laws of science. They accept that science has bottomed out the laws of aerodynamics when they board an aeroplane and that the doctor has scientific data backing his decision to prescribe that particular drug for their heart condition. They do not insist that the world is really flat because it just looks that way. They acknowledge expert opinion in all other aspects of their lives.
These otherwise logical, functional and intelligent members of society often fall under one of the following descriptions:
- There are still pockets of dispute (rather than denial) in the scientific scientific community, a couple of notable examples being Judith Curry and Richard Tol. My reading suggests that when scientist disagree with the conclusions that their colleagues are coming to after studying the same facts, it is generally because they regard those facts as being hijacked and distorted for political or activist reasons. It is a very rare scientist who would actually deny that the world is warming, but there is some disagreement around how much, what effects it will have and what we should do about it.
- Amongst the general public climate change denial is often a way of affirming your place in world as a member of a particular group, with a particular world viewpoint (right wing, free market, libertarian). Republicans in America are the most striking example of this. The two conflicting world views which tend to separate those who do believe in man-made climate change from those who don't are described in the following way: accept climate change "egalitarian-communitarian (reduce inequality and look out for the good of society)", reject climate change ""hierarchical-individualistic (let people alone and respect authority) and ".....it turned out that this measure of value was a much stronger predictor of concern about global warming than was scientific literacy or reasoning skill. "
- A straight forward reason for denial is money. A very large number of rich and powerful people are invested in, or funded by, the fossil fuel industry. A lot of these people are not true deniers, they believe what the facts are saying but don't care, or think that there will be plenty of time for someone else to do something about it at some indeterminate point in the future when it won't impact on their wealth. These people are particularly dangerous as they provide the money that makes the whole political and journalistic machinery of climate change denial possible. They will only change their "minds" when it stops being profitable to be invested in fossil fuels. However, there is now very definite hope that this can be the case.
- There is a form of denial that very many of us are subject to, a so-called "soft denial", which plays a big part in why the fight against climate change is moving so slowly. This is the feeling of hopelessness that accompanies an acceptance of the facts, we feel that it is too late to do anything and no one is listening to us anyway. This form of denial is nothing more than an excuse for apathy. I believe that it must be resisted, for even if it is based on the real nature of the situation ,what are we saying about ourselves if we let it hold sway?
No comments:
Post a Comment