Posted on 10/01/2014 2:54:52 PM PDT by oblomov
Last week’s People's Climate March drew 400,000 people onto the streets of Manhattan and a great deal of international attention to a subject of dire urgency. But some were skeptical about the event’s overall significance. “The march slogan was, ‘to change everything, we need everyone,’ which is telling, because it won’t change everything, because it didn’t include everyone,” wrote David Roberts of Grist. “Specifically, it won’t change American politics because it didn’t include conservatives.” True enough.
If there weren’t such a stark divide between American conservatives and almost everyone else on the question of the existence and importance of climate change — a divide that can approach 40 points on some polling questions — the political situation would be very different. So if any progress on climate change is going to be made through the American political system — apart from executive orders by Democratic presidents — it is going to have to somehow involve convincing a lot of conservatives that yes, climate change is a threat to civilization.
How do you do that? The answer has more to do with psychology than politics.
The practice of tailoring a political message to a particular group is commonplace, of course. But the climate activist community has broadly failed to understand just how differently conservatives and liberals see the world on certain issues, and, as a result, just how radically different messages targeting conservatives should look.
Related Stories How to Win Your Next Political Argument Awareness Is Overrated “Although climate scientists update, appropriately, their models after ten years of evidence, climate-science communicators haven’t,” said Dan Kahan, a professor of law and psychology at Yale who studies how people respond to information challenging their beliefs. Luckily, social and political psychologists are on the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at nymag.com ...
Further quote:
In a study they published in Psychological Science in 2013, Willer and a colleague, the Stanford social psychologist Matthew Feinberg, tested the effectiveness of framing environmental issues in a way that takes into account conservatives’ moral foundations. After completing a questionnaire that included items about their political beliefs, respondents were asked to read one of three excerpts. The unfortunate control group “read an apolitical message on the history of neckties.” For the other two groups, though, what followed was an op-ed-like block of text designed to stoke either “care/harm” (innocents suffering) or “purity/sanctity” (disgust) concerns — one excerpt “described the harm and destruction humans are causing to their environment and emphasized how important it is for people to care about and protect the environment,” while the other touched on “how polluted and contaminated the environment has become and how important it is for people to clean and purify the environment.”
Afterwards, respondents were gauged on their pro-environmental attitudes and belief in global warming. In the care/harm group, there was a sizable gap between liberals and conservatives on both measures. In the disgust group, however, there was no statistically significant difference in general environmental attitudes, and the gap on belief in global warming had been cut significantly.
Psychologists should wonder why clothing companies haven’t stopped making winter jackets......then they can talk to me.
They think we’re stupid and are children.
Need to thin the crop.
Yes, we're not like them. Thank God we're not like them.
Why don’t they figure out how they’ve brain washed the leftists and try the opposite?
Dey gunna try un heep-no-metizer me?
They are piling it higher and deeper in the, “schools” and not just regarding, “climate change”.
So.... When they cannot use the facts, the resort to manipulation...
Sounds about right for the Pro-Regrssive jackwagons on the left...
Maybe that’s what Ebola is here for. (Tongue in cheek)
So if I don’t believe 3 card monte is a fair game I must have psychological issues? So maybe seeing a shrink will convince me to get ripped off.
Global warming is not the problem and is not caused by humans. The global warming propaganda is no more than a distraction by those who want to control markets. The extended solar minimum and magnetic field deviation are problems.
As the magnetic field moves around more quickly, the molten outer core moves around more quickly under the crust. The magnetic field weakens and provides less protection from rays. Unusual weather patterns develop. Volcanism and seismicity also increase. The magnetic field, as it is, exists because of the outer core (mostly iron and nickel).
Lobotomies are the answer.
It is a hoax religeon for embicils
Ask the Climate Liars where the Smoking Hot Spot is.
No smoking hot spot1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.
If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.
What climate change?
Long before there were psycho(logist)s there have been ice ages.
To use a sports analogy from professional basketball, the highest number of points by a single player in a single game is 100, set by Wilt Chamberlain on 2 Mar 1962. In order to beat this record in the same proportion as the calm spell record, a player would have to score 146 points.
Since Global Warming predicts major hurricanes of greater severity and greater frequency, this record breaking calm spell is proof of Global Warming.
Yeah, I remember how that Galileo character wouldn't accept the consensus either. Troublemaker!
and that fat bastard al goron is the L Ron Hubbard of that religion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.