I love how this spreading awareness missive starts out
Why Psychology Should Be A Part Of The Fight Against Climate Change
Climate change isn’t just a political, social and economic issue. It’s also a deeply psychological one — and now, behavioral scientists are using psychology to better understand the complex relationship between people and nature.
Notice what was not mentioned? Science. Glad to see that Warmists are finally admitting that the issue has nothing to do with science.
An increasing number of psychologists are arguing that in order to tackle the growing threat to our environment, we need to understand people’s emotional and cognitive responses to this new reality, which can run the gamut from denial to indifference to outrage to anger to grief.
In other words, they’re very upset that people aren’t rushing out to enable government to restrict their personal freedom, to run their lives, and to vastly artificially increase their cost of living, all after 25+ years of spreading awareness, in what has become an increasingly unhinged manner. They’re desperately searching for a manner in which to get people to give a damn, because, even Warmists generally do not care enough to make changes in their own lives to match their professed beliefs.
“Most people who acknowledge that climate change is occurring feel that the public response has been inadequate,” said Dr. Susan Clayton, a conservation psychologist at the College of Wooster in Ohio. “Psychologists have been looking at how it is that people process this information about risk and come to their understandings — so that’s useful to know in terms of thinking about how you can create messages that are more effective for people in terms of getting them on board.”
Notice the “Other People” syndrome, whereby Warmists expect Everyone Else to care. But, again, why should they when so few Warmists practice what they preach?
It’s not just because people don’t care, she argues. Rather, our emotional response to the issue, which for many people is a deep but unprocessed sense of anxiety and loss, can leave us feeling powerless and paralyzed.
Or, it could be that people think it is a minor issue, particularly when stacked up against real issues, one which most people just do not care about. You can also repeat the whole “practice what you preach” meme.
Anyhow, the rest is all gobbledygook, but, an amusing read.
Why Psych
ologysShould BeArePart OfThe Fight Against Climate ChangeOur esteemed host quoted:
And the left wonder why the white working class has deserted them.
Let me make it really simple: the most important consideration is survival, and somehow the left elites cannot seem to understand that for people who are not well-to-do, putting food on the table today is a lot more important than a 2º temperature change a century from now.
“Psychologists have been looking at how it is that people process this information about risk and come to their understandings — so that’s useful to know in terms of thinking about how you can create messages that are more effective for people in terms of getting them on board.â€
Rather, our emotional response to the issue, which for many people is a deep but unprocessed sense of anxiety and loss, can leave us feeling powerless and paralyzed.
These points sound eerily familiar to the points made by the Church of Scientology on how to deal with the “dangerous environment” around us to live calmer stress-free lives.
It’s a crowded field but this is amongst your dumbest ideas. Of course it has to do with science! The political, social and economic aspects derive from the overwhelming scientific evidence! If the Earth were not warming from our CO2 there would be no global warming dependent political, social, psychological or economic issues to worry about! You’re a very dishonest person.
Was the Montreal Protocol a political, social and economic agreement? Of course – but based on the science of ozone depletion.
How about the Clean Air Act? Do you oppose that political, social and economic agreement? Why should we be even remotely concerned about clean air?
The NRC was formed by the Energy Reorganization Act and is a political, social and economic agreement. Do you oppose the NRC? Why should we be concerned about nuclear proliferation?
No direct scientific proof or data has been shown that link the current observations to human activity.
It’s all in your head!
Of course you move the goalposts. Actually, all the scientific evidence supports the Theory of AGW. You use the concept of “proof” (which cannot exist) as a shibboleth and as a shillelagh.
Is there scientific proof that cigarette smoking causes all cases of lung cancer?
But Teach even YOU are now practicing what they preach
Mostly because of (often government mandated) efficiency Americans have been reducing their carbon pollution/footprint
https://www.google.com/search?q=per+capita+carbon+footprint+us+by+year+graph&espv=2&biw=1275&bih=683&tbm=isch&imgil=vwo7dkk3olBuGM%253A%253BBUkRvM5aNrDtHM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.wri.org%25252Fblog%25252F2014%25252F11%25252F6-graphs-explain-world%25252525E2%2525252580%2525252599s-top-10-emitters&source=iu&pf=m&fir=vwo7dkk3olBuGM%253A%252CBUkRvM5aNrDtHM%252C_&ved=0ahUKEwiz9dfL1bbKAhWEeT4KHU_vBk4QyjcIOw&ei=VpaeVrPyEITz-QHP3pvwBA#imgrc=91ld4QNOzRVl4M%3A
And Teach when you say “most people just do not care about” you should qualify that by saying most Americans. We some of the richest people on the planet will be most able to mitigate any effects.
But, really Teach, if you are a self centered narcissist , who else on the planet matters?