General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsClimate Change Debate Fueled by ‘Echo Chambers,’ New Study Finds
College Park, Md and Annapolis, Md — A new study from researchers at the University of Maryland (UMD) and the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) demonstrates that the highly contentious debate on climate change is fueled in part by how information flows throughout policy networks.
The UMD and SESYNC researchers found that “echo chambers”—social network structures in which individuals with the same viewpoint share information with each other—play a significant role in climate policy communication. The researchers say that echo chambers may help explain why, despite a well-documented scientific consensus on the causes and drivers of global changes in climate, half of U.S. senators voted earlier this year against an amendment affirming that climate change is human-induced.
A peer-reviewed paper based on the study was published online May 25 in the journal Nature Climate Change.
“Our research shows how the echo chamber can block progress toward a political resolution on climate change. Individuals who get their information from the same sources with the same perspective may be under the impression that theirs is the dominant perspective, regardless of what the science says,” said Dr. Dana R. Fisher, a professor of sociology at UMD and corresponding author who led the research.
http://www.sesync.org/news/climate-change-debate-echo-chambers
Keep in mind that it goes both ways -- denial as well as zealous declarations that every blip on the weather radar is due to climate change.
I would also submit that this kind of "echo chamber" approach exists for all environmental discussions -- GMOs, vaccinations, bees, whatever. Simple minded people will tend to keep the discussions "pure" by excluding those with different points of view, regardless of how valid they might be.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
ananda
(28,874 posts).. you know, part of a complex nexus worldwide, then in a sense
every so-called "blip on the radar" is a part of climate change.
However, it's the more extreme events that get attention, I think.
In my area of Texas it's a wide see-saw between drought and flooding
right now.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)... one cannot (and must not!) assign every extreme weather event to climate change. "If A then B" does not necessary imply "If B then A." It's a logical fallacy.
The stark reality is that climate change is just beginning, and many parts of the U.S. will be nearly unaffected by it in the future. Texas is one of those places: average rainfall and average precipitation is not expected to change much for at least 25 years.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)The debate over climate change is useful only to those who oppose new environmental regulations. It allows them to say, "We can't be sure climate change is the result of human activity, so we must allow my corporate donors to keep right on doing what they're doing." This has a certain commonsense appeal, although it's quite reckless and presents a false dichotomy. It's the old argument that we must avoid doing anything about a problem unless we can solve the whole problem. It's all or nothing. But we never solve problems that way, and we never will.
Let's use polio as an example. When we began the major effort to vaccinate people against polio, we knew it would not be effective in some cases, and we knew a few people would die from the vaccinations. But we went ahead because we knew that polio would continue to kill and maim too many people if we stood around waiting for a perfect solution. I just wish we could approach problems like global warming the same way we fight wars. It doesn't bother us at all to send our military personnel half way around the world to risk their lives and kill large numbers of people in foreign lands, but we get all queasy about trying a few regulations to address climate change.
Excellent comments. Thank you.
