Continued commentary on How to talk climate change with a skeptic: 5 critical tips by Sam Parry.
The five tips are:
1. First of all: Don’t get angry.
2. Leave apocalypse to the movies.
3. Seek common ground.
4. Tell your own stories.
5. Stick to the facts.
The last three posts dealt with tips 1 and 2. Now we’ll tackle #3:
Seek common ground.
“By expressing respect for people’s religious or political views you may be able to persuade them that curbing climate change isn’t at odds with their identity….”
Hold it right there. Parry is assuming that skeptics have identity issues. Can’t he see how incredibly condescending this approach is? We’re already at the 3rd of 5 tips about how to talk to climate change skeptics and have yet to receive any advice about how to hear them - that is, to engage in active listening. If you listen to skeptics, you’ll learn they come in many flavors.
My number one tip for communicating with (not talking to) skeptics: start with questions, listen, ask follow-up questions, and keep your own opinions to yourself until after you have heard them out. That’s how you show respect.
What is the skeptic's actual position on climate change? How did they arrive at that position? What do they see as weaknesses in the case for climate change?
Here, for instance, are some variations of climate change skepticism:
Actively denies climate change is happening
Not convinced climate change is happening
Accepts climate change but considers it entirely due to natural fluctuations
Accepts climate change may be at least partly due to human activity but not convinced it’s a serious threat to biosphere
Accepts climate change is largely due to human activity but stresses the benefits to climate change
Accepts climate change is largely due to human activity but not convinced it’s a serious threat to biosphere
Accepts climate change is largely due to human activity and acknowledges its potential to be a serious threat to biosphere but cautions against aggressive mitigation measures
Accepts anthropogenic climate change but thinks global warming projections have been exaggerated by many environmental activists.
Accepts anthropogenic climate change but criticizes the climate change models
Accepts anthropogenic climate change but stresses the uncertainties in projecting the extent and effects of climate change.
Accepts anthropogenic climate change but questions the assumptions in climate change modeling, such as about population growth, technological advances, human fertility, consumption patterns, economic growth, settlement patterns, etc.
Accepts anthropogenic climate change and endorses the least extreme of IPCC projections re: green house gas concentrations and extent/impact of global warming.
Accepts anthropogenic climate change and the lower end of IPCC projections but advocates a “wait and see” approach to mitigation and/or adaptation.
Skeptical about climate change although used to accept it. Put off by environmental activists for various reasons, including the tendency of activists to:
- Appeal to arguments of authority
- Denigrate skeptics as anti-science
- Dismiss dissenting viewpoints without giving them a fair hearing
- Overstate the evidence for catastrophic climate change
- Overlook that the science of climate change is still at an early stage
- Exaggerate the certainty of climate change projections
- Rely on ad hominem attacks to marginalize skeptics, such as questioning their motivation (e.g., financial gain, ideology)
- Jump on any error of fact or logic as “proof” a skeptic’s whole case is bogus
- Psychologize skeptics, such as attributing skepticism to psychological issues, such as “identity” conflicts.