Some people reject the self-evident truths of climate change; others hold world views that don’t easily find common ground with science. So how can they best be persuaded of the need for action?
Free market ideologues: “Saying climate change is the greatest threat to our world is a grab for global government by crazy catastrophists.” This group may not deny basic climate science, but they deny its importance. They see calls to clamp down on emissions as a threat to the free market that drives capitalism.
Advertisement
Response: Ask why markets don’t reflect the costs associated with climate change. Free markets need social and political stability, and so climate stability too. Big banks, insurance firms and oil companies have called for action on climate change. Government dilly-dallying is anathema to their bottom lines.
Read more: How we’re living with climate change and can beat it
91av looks at the reality of climate change: what we’re doing about it, what more we must do and what the future holds in a warmer world
Christian ideologues: “The bible says humans have dominion over the Earth” and “it’s all part of God’s plan”. Many Christians, particularly US evangelicals, say nature is for us to use as we see fit. It ties in with a political agenda opposed to collectivism, so reticent on issues that need collective action.
Response: Ask what happened to the strain of evangelism that sees “dominion” as meaning stewardship. Many other Christians say this gives us a moral imperative to tackle climate change. And climate change threatens the poorest most. Christian morals (and indeed the pope) say the fortunate should help those who are less fortunate.
Traditional conservatives: “The weather always changes, this is a green fad. Anyhow, the scientists don’t agree. And none of my friends believe in it.” This is an age-old drumbeat. During the latest UK general election, climate campaigners identified 18 MPs in the previous parliament .
Response: They can be persuaded with science. Point out that this is no fad. The greenhouse effect is 200-year-old physics. And climate models say more or less the same thing as chemist Svante Arrhenius calculated using pen and paper over a century ago.
The “we’re doomed” brigade: “You can’t change human behaviour, so you can’t stop the emissions.”This is not so much denialism as doomsday determinism, but it’s odd how many people go from arguing that “there is no problem” to “there is nothing we can do about it anyway”.
Response: Buy them a drink and explain how renewables are taking over. People do change their behaviour. The bar you are drinking in would have been full of smoke just 20 years ago.
This article appeared in print under the headline “Talking to climate sceptics”
