tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4768427843914361308.post7011906326840521265..comments2023-11-30T07:41:49.496-08:00Comments on Honest Ab: Evolution and Related Topics: Why I Will Not Talk with a Climate Change DenialistHonest Abhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06251012809906602547noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4768427843914361308.post-24484724931252155452017-06-20T14:04:43.084-07:002017-06-20T14:04:43.084-07:00It's hard not to lose your temper in situation...It's hard not to lose your temper in situations like these. I know I feel like exploding when I hear and see nonsense like this from people. I believe it is outrageously arrogant for a person with no scientific training to believe that he or she knows more about a scientific topic than a person who has actually devoted his or her life to studying the subject. It would be like telling an engineer that I know more about bridge building and how to keep a skyscraper from tumbling down than he or she does...or telling Ben and Jerry I know more about making ice cream than either of them (note: I don't make ice cream). However, that is not the thought process of these people. They think there is some grand conspiracy, and why do they think this? Because their information sources (brainwashing sources) tell them that this is true. I recently had a conversation with a woman who told me that scientists have uncovered evidence of an ancient civilization under the Antarctic ice and it was going to completely change history. She thought I needed to know this information since I am looking for a job as a school librarian. She was adamant this was true; I'd never heard it before and figured it was nonsense since no news organization was talking about it. Come to find out, the "news" organizations that had put out this information were tabloids. Oh, and she told me I shouldn't believe the Discovery Channel or NASA when it came to this kind of information, but apparently, I should believe tabloids????? It's kind of funny, but it's also very sad. What I am trying to make myself feel is pity for these people rather than anger. The truth is that they are being manipulated by those conspiracy nutjobs out there who are spewing this garbage. And then the nutjobs tell them that anyone who disagrees with them is part of the conspiracy, and the audience just laps it all up. So the conspiracy theorists out there--some of whom actually believe the nonsense they're peddling, some who don't care and are just in it for a buck--have succeeded in making people see the world in a nonfactual, conspiracy-laden way. The problem is, as Ken Hobson notes, you can't just go up to that person and say, "Oh, poor you. You are so ignorance and innocent. Do you not see how you've been brainwashed?" because these people like to think of themselves as savvy news consumers who can't be swayed by the "liberal media." So as Ken notes, you have to rely on something else. Everything I've read about dealing with climate deniers is that they do not respond to facts. Why? Because they have their own misinformants spewing lies. From what I've read, one must approach these people with humility and compassion and explain not what the facts are but our personal stories instead. For instance, what originally made you passionate about the environment? Describe the majesty of the world around you. Has someone you've known suffered from pollution? What other connections do you have to the environment? It is hard, but you have to treat them respectfully even if in your heart, you know they're idiots. :-/ (Sorry for the long response.)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03839490318754883132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4768427843914361308.post-33019582376634839012017-06-17T15:38:16.735-07:002017-06-17T15:38:16.735-07:00Stan, first, you are a bright and wonderful gem in...Stan, first, you are a bright and wonderful gem in Oklahoma. You grew up here, know the state, can relate to the geography, plants, life, history, language and all. For years and generations of students you have labored to bring your advanced training, understanding of, and enthusiasm for the natural world - and of science generally, to all who you met. In your work and through entirely volunteer efforts such as OAS, OESE and even the Farmer's Market. You have done a great deal of good; and reached people who others, lacking your cultural roots, could not reach. So, give yourself some golden stars and some quiet satisfaction. You are a great resource for Oklahoma. Having said all the above.. I can also agree that it is a difficult time to carry our message of science. I recently had a 3-4 day exchange of facebook messages back and forth with a stranger, a friend of a relative in a state back east. Younger man, alternately civil (because not wanting to offend family of his friend) and outrageously dismissive of scientific expertise. Ignorant of any basic science, he declared his views about how completely incorrect I was about everything to do with climate and other science. Striving for equanimity (in hope of maintaining some comity and the possibility of some glimmer of enlightenment for him and maybe even some mutual learning), I managed to forward to send him the exec summary of the IPCC and the position statements of the AAAS. Something piqued his curiosity. I think he may have read a bit.. but a day later (I think probably reinforced by his online buddies) he haughtily dismissed them as garbage, and returned a paper from the CATO INST. as an authoritative rejoinder. We continued our give and take for a few more days. I tried to be gentle and considerate and he was markedly more dismissive of my intelligence and critical thinking. I didn't mention any of my university training (at Berkeley, Oxford, Washington, Wisconsin, N Carolina, UCSB et al.), but it is all on my 'Facebook' page, where the conversation began. He knew, I think, that I was 'a doctor'. I was aware that climate denialists often suspect (& hate feeling like) their interlocutors believe them to be ignorant. I did not want to create this barrier. After a few days, it became apparent (to both of us) I think that information was not going to get through and persuasion was not going to happen. We both gradually withdrew with marginally cordial parting shots. Days after, I am struck by how this middle-aged stranger with some university training (no science and perhaps no degree) felt empowered and privileged to call me deluded (I drank the 'kool-aid'in his words.) No respect for learning or expertise whether it be me or IPCC or AAAS. He felt it quite appropriate that he call us out as either paid-off evil-doers or simpletons not able to decipher plain truth. I have kept the conversation and hope to use it verbatim with his name removed in my classes (and in my own thinking) - considering how to reach for truth and share knowledge or wisdom in times such as these. Strikes me we need a new Socrates, or Plato. Or perhaps, better, a Carl Sagan to capture the emotional lower brains of our citizens so that their higher brain cognitive centers will pay attention. I suspect that clever marketers and spin doctors have already figured out the science and have been employed by the opposing camp for many years to produce the current impasse. Enough. Rest a while, Stan. Smile. You have done well. You still have much to give. You can become a John Muir and give to those who will come to walk with you in the world.Ken Hobsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18206769613609596391noreply@blogger.com