Editorials & Other Articles

n2doc

(47,953 posts) Thu Jun 26, 2014, 07:46 AM Jun 2014

Conservatives Don't Deny Climate Science Because of Ignorance. They Deny It Because of Who They Are

For many years, the US National Science Foundation, more recently with the help of the General Social Survey, has asked the public the same true or false question about evolution: "Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals." And for many years, the responses to this question have been dismal. In 2006, 2008, and 2010, for instance, less than half of the public correctly answered "true."

In 2012, however, the NSF and GSS conducted an experiment to try to better understand why people fare so badly on this evolution question. For half of survey respondents, the words "according to the theory of evolution" were added to the beginning of the statement above. And while only 48 percent gave the correct answer to the unaltered question, an impressive 72 percent correctly answered the new, prefaced version.

So why such a huge gap? Perhaps the original question wasn't tapping into scientific knowledge at all; rather, it was challenging the religious identity of creationists who think the earth is less than 10,000 years old. Presented with the new phrasing, however, even many creationists know what the theory of evolution states; they just deny that it is true. So are these people really "scientifically illiterate," as many in the science world might claim, or are they instead...something else?

This is a vital question in the field of science communication, because at its core is the issue of whether we are dealing with mass public scientific illiteracy on the one hand (which presumably could be fixed by education), or with something much deeper and more intractable. What's more, this problem isn't confined to evolution. The issue of climate change may be very similar in this respect. Ask a polling question about climate change in one way, and you may cause conservatives to reassert their ideological identities, and reject the most important finding of climate science (that humans are causing global warming). But ask it in another way and, well, it may turn out that they know what the science says after all (even if they don't personally believe it).

more
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/06/dan-kahan-climate-change-ideology-scientific-illiteracy

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Conservatives Don't Deny Climate Science Because of Ignorance. They Deny It Because of Who They Are (Original Post) n2doc Jun 2014 OP

They deny it because environmentalism hinders job creators. merrily Jun 2014 #1

I want to study why we don't just ignore them instead of using deniers as an excuse to do nothing. KurtNYC Jun 2014 #2

Can't ignore them n2doc Jun 2014 #5

That isn't power. The answer to that one is: don't buy real estate on the Outer Banks of NC KurtNYC Jun 2014 #6

Propoganda. Evergreen Emerald Jun 2014 #3

like I said, if it weren't profitable to write policies based on what the people who think that MisterP Jun 2014 #4

merrily

(45,251 posts)

1. They deny it because environmentalism hinders job creators.

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Thu Jun 26, 2014, 08:01 AM

Jun 2014

And, even when it doesn't hinder them, they fight it because it might hinder them in the future.

If you really need reasons why job creators should be taxed, I have at least three, air, water and food.

KurtNYC

(14,549 posts)

2. I want to study why we don't just ignore them instead of using deniers as an excuse to do nothing.

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Thu Jun 26, 2014, 08:19 AM

Jun 2014

It is not like we need 100% consensus in order to move forward.

IMHO we need to start talking more about actions and solutions and stop obsessing about "deniers." By making denial the center of the discussion we give them the power to set the agenda (just like we do with Fox News). We have the numbers, let's turn a deaf ear and move forward.

http://www.europeanceo.com/business-and-management/2014/06/germany-breaks-solar-power-records/

n2doc

(47,953 posts)

5. Can't ignore them

Reply to KurtNYC (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 26, 2014, 01:53 PM

Jun 2014

They have way too much power. See:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025149420

for an example.

I do think we need to stop treating their opinions as anything other than a malevolent joke. And call them out on it every time they interfere.

KurtNYC

(14,549 posts)

6. That isn't power. The answer to that one is: don't buy real estate on the Outer Banks of NC

Reply to n2doc (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 26, 2014, 02:54 PM

Jun 2014

The story you linked to shows that this isn't about what deniers believe or don't believe about carbon -- it is about money. That story is realtors and home builders on the Outer Banks want to sell property that is predicted to be 39 inches lower relative to sea level in 85 years time. They are holding land that is sinking in value so THAT is why they want climate change data suppressed. That is closer to panic than power on my scorecard.

While the MSM loves their bogus "climate debate," the new story is insurance so the real power is with huge insurance companies:

“This is a new kind of storm associated with climate change,” Tom LaPorte, spokesman for the Chicago Department of Water Management, told Medill Reports on day two of the April flood. Extreme flooding is part of a pattern that has emerged in the last two decades, according to Illinois State climatologist Jim Angel.

Now a major insurance company is suing Chicago-area municipal governments saying they knew of the risks posed by climate change and should have been better prepared. The class-action lawsuits raise the question of who is liable for the costs of global warming.

Filed by Farmers Insurance Co. on behalf of itself, other insurance companies and customers whose property was damaged by the surge of storm water and sewage overflow, the lawsuits allege the governments of Chicago-area municipalities knew their drainage systems were inadequate and failed to take reasonable action to prevent flooding of insured properties.

“During the past 40 years, climate change in Cook County has caused rains to be of greater volume, greater intensity and greater duration than pre-1970 rainfall history evidenced,” a fact that local governments were well aware of, a suit filed in Cook County, Ill., alleges, citing a climate change action plan adopted in 2008 that acknowledges the link between climate change and increased rainfall.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/05/19/climate-change-get-ready-or-get-sued/

Just one plaintiff there, Farmer's Insurance is part of Zurich Insurance, the 75th largest public company in the world with $75+ billion in annual revenue alone. Lloyd's is in that thing too and a bunch of other major insurance companies. If insurance companies won't insure the outer banks and similar property then banks can't lend on those properties and values on the Outer Banks will collapse no matter what their lobbyists do. THAT's power.

These kinds of actions by the trillion dollar insurance industry are going to force the real action on climate change. If Life is a game of chance then insurance companies are the casino (and they don't lose).

Other major suits include youth suing the Federal Government over failure to act on climate change. 4/25/14 DC Circuit court finds that youth have standing to sue, case will proceed:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/179533/can-ancient-doctrine-force-government-act-climate-change#

Going forward I think the best strategy is to start ignoring deniers and instead put more focus on what each of us can do as individuals and through our organizations and affiliations to limit the change and help succeeding generations live with it.

Evergreen Emerald

(13,069 posts)

3. Propoganda.

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Thu Jun 26, 2014, 09:32 AM

Jun 2014

The masses believe their leaders, and assume the leaders are working for their best interest. The leaders of course are working for big business who wants to pocket as much money as they can, with no regulation, and no thought for what their actions do to the environment. They count on an ignorant electorate. And, so far their scheme has been working. Those who elect them, are doing so against their best interest, against the future of the planet, and are generally the loudest indignant idiots I have ever seen.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)

4. like I said, if it weren't profitable to write policies based on what the people who think that

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Thu Jun 26, 2014, 01:45 PM

Jun 2014

boxes of Celestial Seasonings tea let Satan into your house because it has a star on the back believe, they wouldn't

Reply to this discussion